x < 
see Hite 
oi tt ee 

Me, He his 


rece 
era 


iste fe 
: 


eae 


a eee 
fy 


i 
RI ce 
Mitta iu fh Mf a if 

ee fuk 
rh 


feet 


fy 


hey 


bey 


ae i 
‘ 
ie 
i 


in 
as ie 
aS 
oo 
es 

LAL) th nh 


ft, f 
ibe 


of 
i 
detente 
ete iu 
fate 
Hf 


Hie (is 
Hiei: it 


streets itt 
feet bette © 
nk 
Bh aa ges 
fee aed 
cesta 


ee 
catia ‘ 
if aS rey Ak 
Meee eit 
che fete PN Feet tee 
phoices ac cath 
freee 


fi ‘ie 
oe 


a 


hey 
S ne 
Fe ae 


a 


ass, 
Bs 


SSS 


Met 


aA 
1.3," 
tert 
ee itakes 


.. 


faite 


tite 


pest At 
tes ise et 
nea fe Ee 


ued 
Bie eH 
2 


| : a : 
i 


Leyte) 
iW 


i ie 
ae oo 
hee itty 


gt we a oe 


senile 


Prt 
tsk, 
i Bie 


ie 


Boge ts oy 
ieebes 
teeth 
Onn Oe 
fia dais a 
f tes 


fetes i 
: 


Be 


Ad 


ts | 
Hi cee 
fee 


Mike ae 
fa 


teansta 


fie 
_ : 
f? His 
a iq 


fe fst at . af 
eh 7 oe ee is ; 


t 


i + 
A 
Regie 

fet he 
i331 


an a5 Ses 
See cee 
een os Doss acy a: 
Rene Se ASR eees 
sets : 


wr 


A ft 
AEG oa ite 
Be fe 


af 
fh 

ee adh 
oe i 


Li set Md 
ci fet 


i 


Hite 
ey 
hs fie 
Cae . lec 
feed 
iets 


fete 
miuetin 


a 


bee 
% 

e 

‘iS 


sen 
PE tt 
rf ef 
halite Cs tea ih tite 
at 


Me 


Cael 


a 


rent pe 


sine 


ue 
rtf) ities 


ie, 
7 


THE UNIVERSITY 
OF ILLINOIS 
LIBRARY 
620, "] 
Tk lo 8 


no. 20 $-22% 


AGRICULTURAL 
LIBRARY 


9 OTR Ey 


fay & 


x 
¢ 
< 
ss 
yee 
by 
ink 
S 
} 1 


~~ 


aint) 


* 


UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 


Aoricultural Experiment Station 


BULLETIN No. 211 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION 
APPLE SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES 


By CHARLES S. CRANDALL 


URBANA, ILLINOIS, JUNE, 1918 


CONTENTS OF BULLETIN No. 211 


PAGE 
ENTRADUOTION. $5685 So c'ste as, ha oe ee RRR eGR Eo seed ake mice se Sane ea 181 
APPHE-BUD JSEURCTION © 5 o9icicre ick oe a's AER OP R MC his nine Mie dee mTale Wiss eiest wk eRe Aes 181 
Test of Size: Large Buds and Small Buds.............. ccc cee eceeees 183 
The 1,000:Series......... Ea ties ell a Sow in on 6 eia wih Nak we ey oie Rey 183 
Growth of Trees in Relation to Size of Buds from which Prop- 
pated << oes odes oe tun 31s ahs Cte ee Ts 185 
Other Factors Affecting Growth Be eS is oh ion ae: 200 
The 24,000 Series 66255 (se oe Sas aes SON ta Wheeden cet Sees 201 
The 14,000 Spree ss. FE Tee heed bors Cs ae wn OS eee ese 201 
Discussion” Of Repaltss 5. .Csie anaes Sore ea tO Dae a peene SEER Se ep es 201 
Comparative Value of Buds from Different Locations on Tree........... 202 
Losses in the Various Series: ......5....0scccsececceeees rare 204 
Endurance of Trees by Varietal Groups...............ecee eee ees 205 
Endurance of Trees from Buds Grouped According to Location on 
ot Ne OR era a i SROs Dia ties a SiS BieAee ielore Brg nite ed 206 
Growth the Only Basis for Comparison...............0eseeeeeeeee 207 
Comparative Value of Buds from Different Locations on Shoot.......... 232 
GOWER = Of + EP TOON G2) 2S 2 5 codin etsy. tas eee MN oth Wie &: wbeae Ss hs td vignette 233 
Comparative Value of Robust and Slender Scions...................+4: 250 
Effect of- Vigor: of Stock on Growth... s50i dicted « < aheis tine «ane ale wr vies 252 
Influence of Care in Grafting....... MEENA ASS as HEKw Se RE ASR OEN Se SEED 252 
Varictal and Individual Differences. 03... 0.60 cee. cena peed acess eeas 253 
Discussion of? Results. Suis eh eve. sie he alee ow Ree ON ware J Bie es 254 
-GROWING SEEDLINGS FROM SEEDS OF F'RUITS FROM TREES CHOSEN AS POSSES- 
sine~ SPECIAL. MRRI 6. ass S05 Raton ob yee ne ew Fe eas em ee 254 
Seedlings from Fruits of 1908............. Ge eaves Gian sotebwn’ pociees 254 
Seedlings from Fruits of 1909........-....: Saheb one sedans e+ +256 


CONCLUBIONS oo eo saaea eh evens gE ntbik lattes Cee Doe wiaiale Rae ee EERE aR TES 263 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION 
APPLE SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES 


By CHARLES S. CRANDALL, Cuter 1n PLANT BREEDING IN HORTICULTURE 


INTRODUCTION 


In addition to hybridizing, which stands as the major project in 
apple breeding as outlined and undertaken by the Department of Hor- 
ticulture in 1907, two minor projects in selection were entered npos at 
the same time. These are: 


1. Growing apple trees from selected buds to determine whether 
or not there are differences in value, for purposes of propaga- 
tion, between large buds and small buds, between buds pro- 
duced on different parts of the tree, and between buds from 
different locations on the shoot. 

2. Growing apple seedlings from fruits from trees chosen as pos- 
sessing special merit. 


The nature of the plants is such that the projects must of necessity 
extend over a considerable number of years. Judgment as to the value 
of a fruit tree is based upon capacity to bear fruit and upon the char- 
acter of the fruit produced. It follows that trees propagated from 
selected seeds or from selected buds must become well established in 
fruit production before conclusions are possible from which answers to 
the original questions may be formulated. 


It is the purpose of this publication to bring together the records 
thus far made in connection with these minor projects, to present the 
. methods pursued, and to give the status.of the trees growing under 
each of the projects. 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION 


This project is an attempt to discover and bring out such differ- 
ences in value, for purposes of propagation, as are commonly supposed 
to exist between large buds and small buds, between buds from differ- 
ent situations on the same tree, and between buds from different loca- 
tions on the same shoot. The trees grown under the project are divided 
into groups designated as series and numbered by thousands to prevent 
confusing any of them with numbered groups in other projects. 


181 


182 - APPLE-BUD SELECTION; SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 
Selection of the buds began in 1908 and additions were made in 

each of the three years following. The aggregate is fourteen series 

represented by 5,400 selected buds distributed as shown in Table 1. 


TABLE 1,—DiIsTRIBUTION OF SELECTED Buns, By SERIES 


: No. of No. of 

Year Series Test hie waxtetind 
1908 1 000 ' Size 100 5 
2 000 Location on tree 450 5 
3 000 Location on shoot 320 5 
1909 4 000 Location on tree 750 13 
5 000 Location on shoot 430 10 
6 000 Size 220 11 
7 000 Location on tree 290 6 
8 000 Location on shoot , 190 6 
1910 9 000 Location on tree 840 12 
10 000 Location on shoot 450 1l 
11 000 _ Size 240 12 
1911 12 000 Location ‘on tres 530 I 
13 000 Location on shoot 330. 1l 
14 000 - > Size _- 260 13 

Total 5 400 


When one year old, all living trees in the 4,000, 5,000, and.6,000 
series, originally represented by 1,400 selected buds, were transferred 
to the Station farm at Olney and, because of incomplete growth re- 
cords, are not to be further considered at this time. The two other 
series selected in 1909, the 7,000 and 8,000 series, differ from all other 
series in that here, the selected buds, instead of bemg propagated by 
grafting in the spring, were budded in August of that year, and as 
they were dormant until the next spring, the trees rate, as to age, with 
those selected and propagated in the spring of 1910. 

Of the eleven series here considered, three, with 600 selected buds, 
represent the comparison between large and small buds; four series, 
with 2,110 buds, represent the test of location on tree; and four, with © 
1,290 buds, represent the test of location on shoot. — 

Numbers of buds in the different series varied for two reasons; in 
some cases the time available for making grafts was limited; in other 
cases series were incomplete because buds desired were not available. 
These irregularities occurred mainly in those series including buds 
from different locations on the tree. 

Buds from twenty-one varieties were used, but these varieties did 
not have equal representation. Five varieties were represented in 
nearly all series; these were Yellow Transparent, Oldenburg, Winesap, 
Grimes, and Ben Davis. Other varieties represented in one or more 
of the series were Jonathan, Fameuse, Minkler, Kinnard, Willow, 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 183 


Whitney, Rome, Osimoe, Huntsman, Isham, Twenty Ounce, Dominie, 
Arkansas Black, York Imperial, Cornell, and Sweet Bellflower. 


Test oF Size: LARGE Bups AND SMALL Bups 


The test of size of buds included three series: the 1,000 series of 
100 buds, selected in 1908; the 11,000 series of 240 buds, selected in 
1910; and the 14,000 series of 260 buds, selected in 1911. 


THE 1,000 SERIES 


Buds were selected in groups of ten and, using scions approxi- 
mately six inches in length, were root-grafted, by the veneer method, 
on ordinary apple stocks. For the 1,000 series, the numbers 
1,001 to 1,010 were given to the grafts made with the ten selected buds 
of large size, and the numbers 1,011 to 1,020 to the grafts made with 
the selected buds of small size, all from the same Yellow Transparent 
tree. This plan of numbering was also used for the varieties Olden- 
burg, Ben Davis, Winesap, and Grimes. There were then 100 grafts 
in this series as made up in February, 1908. 

In selecting for large size, terminal buds from central terminal 
shoots on bearing trees were chosen, because these, in most varieties, 
were the largest to be found on the trees. With Grimes, however, the 
terminal buds of terminal shoots were quite small, many of them pro- 
truding but little from the concavity formed by the enlargement of the 
tip of the shoot. Short lateral shoots just below the terminal shoots 
were, in most eases, crowned with large, well-developed terminal buds, 
and these were the buds selected in this variety. It occasionally hap- 
pened in other varieties that on vigorous terminal shoots the apical 
bud was undeveloped, the food supply having been appropriated by 
an adjacent bud in an upper axil. In such cases the large lateral bud 
was the one selected. The small buds were, in most eases, lateral buds 
from short interior branches, but with Grimes, terminal buds of in- 
terior branches were selected as. being smaller than the laterals on 
these branches, or on other branches elsewhere on the tree. When a 
lateral bud was selected, the shoot was cut back to this bud so that in all 
grafts the chosen bud was at the distal end of the scion. The scions were 
tied with raffia, the unions waxed with alcoholic plastic, and the grafts 
stored in moist sphagnum until the series was complete; they were 
then transferred to sand, where they remained until planted in the 
field, May 12, 1908. Table 2 shows the averages for length and diam- 
eter of shoot, and the number of buds; and, for buds, the averages for 
length and diameter, and also the length of-scion and the number of 
buds on scion used. 

At the time of planting the grafts (May 12), the selected buds 
appeared to be in good condition, but when checked over twenty-four 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


184 


OT L°ST VG 8G 1G c'¢ G's g'¢ 8°0& OOTT-T60L | FSTBUS| 
éI 8 9T Lv 69 0Z Lv 0'v 0°9 8° 6Z OGOI-T8OT | ysestwy|**** °° ss STAB Ueg 
€1 G91 £°€ 99°F 61 . G'S GG 6°S 0° &% OSOT-TZ0T | 3s9TTeuIg 
ST GOL 9'F v9 8S oe gy 9°9 G &% OLOT-T90T | ysedmeT) "s+ *- 7's desouryy 
6 8 FI o's 6'E #0 TZ o'% 8's 8° FI O9OT-TSOT | WeTTeuTg 
6 9°ST vYV 49 Or 8% 0's vv 0°9T OSOT-TFOT | ysedrey| sss ts 8's seuTEED 
6 8 FT 6 T ST ST ve c"é og 0°96 OFOT-TEOT | $SeTTeUIg 
or g’éI vv ¢¢ LT 9°F TP €°9 0°SI OSOT-IZOL | sedrey) "°°: "* *BinqueplO 
II 0°ST GE ‘SP ras 23 LZ 0'¢ G°LT OZOT-ITOT | JoeT[BUg 
6 ¢'9T 9'% v9. ST 9'€ O'F L°9 0°98 OLOT-TOOT | 38edaey|** *quoredsuvry, MOTa A 
spnq he (‘urur) te tae apng Te38!C_ | STPPHAL [86g CG wud) ‘ 
0 ‘oO qsue yyprm | yysuet | Joon > yysuey, | siequin spnq 
Sivsecy aietestt WSBIOAV Sema OSvIOAV (AAT). STO TD ORR AY. osVIOAV [8lseg jo azIg Aye A 
wolog png yoous 


Q06T 40 SNOILOATAY 40 SLNAWAUASVAY ‘sang 40 azig 40 Isa, —z AIavV], 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 185 


days later it was found that eleven of the buds had not started or had 
started and immediately died. These failures were fairly well dis- 
tributed. Six were in lots of large buds and five in lots of small buds. 
The buds that were growing on June 6 exhibited all degrees of’ vigor. 
Some were strong, others so weak that their early death was foreseen. 
When the plants were taken up for winter storage (November 3), 77 
were living; most of them were fairly vigorous, but a few were small 
and weak. Of the 23 failures, 12 were of small buds and 11 of large 
buds. The greatest loss in any one lot was five of the small buds of 
Winesap, and next to this was the loss of four of the large buds of 
Ben Davis. One lot, the small buds of Oldenburg, came thru this first 
season with the full complement of ten. During 1909 six of the weak 
trees died, so that at the close of this second season the losses totaled 29. 
In the spring of 1910 the remaining 71 trees of this series were planted 
in orchard. Four more trees died during this third season.. More 
serious losses occurred during the first winter in orchard. Of the 17 


trees recorded as dead in the fall of 1911, some had not started in the 


spring and some had made a feeble effort at growth and then died. 
Thus 50 percent of the buds included in this series dropped out during 
the first three years. The 50 trees remaining are established, and altho 
exhibiting differences in vigor, should reach maturity unless lost thru 
accident. | ; : 

Of the trees lost, a few were destroyed by rabbits or were 
broken down by storms, but the chief cause of loss appeared to have 
been weakness or want of vitality, whether in the buds chosen, in the 
scion, or in the stock, it was not possible to determine. In considering 
distribution of the losses, there is nothing to suggest a superior vitality 
on the part of large buds; in fact, the number of failures of large buds 
was two greater than the number from small buds. For three varieties 
the losses were equally divided between large and small buds, for one 
variety the loss for small buds was greater, and for another the loss for 
large buds was greater. Trees living in 1915 were divided as follows: 
Yellow Transparent, one from large bud and one from small; Grimes 
and Ben. Davis, six each from large and small; Winesap, six large and 
four small; Oldenburg, five large and nine small. 


Growth of Trees in Relation to Size of Buds from which Propagated 


The basis of comparison of trees is vigor as indicated by growth 
increment. For the first two years the leader and branches were meas- 
ured and the total was recorded for each tree, but as the trees increased 
_ in size this procedure became impracticable. In the third year (1910) 
growth of leader only was recorded, and in succeeding years measure- 
ments of height and spread only were recorded. This change destroys 
the uniformity of the record, but does not in any way interfere with 
the comparison it is desired to make between the two groups of trees, 


186 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


those from large buds and those from small, in the matter of growth. 

At no time during the eight years of this experiment did there 
appear any striking differences between the groups of trees from large 
buds and those from small buds. There were and still are marked 
differences between individuals in the same group, but the summation 
of growth records for the different groups shows that they closely 
approximated thruout. Bringing the averages of growth together, in 
tabular form, by years, and for the last five years considering total 
height only, they are as shown in Table 3. 


TABLE 3.—COMPARISON OF GROWTH OF TREES FROM LARGE BupDS AND FROM 
Smatu Bups: 1,000 Srrres 


Variet Size of | No. of __ Average of growth (inches) 
pape bud | trees |1908/1909]1910}1911|1912)1913|1914|1915 
Yellow Transparent...| Large 1 21 | 11 | 11 | 37 | 40 | 53 | 74 | 92 
Small 1 17| 6]. 9] 42 | 50| 60 | 72] 93 
‘Oldenburg...... .... Large 5 | 15 | 26] 11 | 46 | 49 | 63 | 70 | 92 
. Small 9 | 11 | 20 | 12 | 37 | 45 | 58 | 72 | 98 
Grimes... 00.6. 02: Large 6 19 | 20} 9 | 42 | 51 | 64 | 80 | 102 
Small 6 21 | 16] 8 | 38 | 47 | 53 | 64] 90 
Winesap ie eetere s Large 6 28 | 17 | 9] 46 | 55 | 70 | 88 | 116 
Z Small t 21 | 10 | 11] 46 | 56 | 72 | 89 | 113 
Ben Davis (66505 Large 6 28 }19] 9] 43 | 52.| 64] 78 | 98 
Small 6 20 | 21 7 | 46 | 56 | 69 | 84 | 109 


Notre.—Total growth is given for 1908 and 1909, for 1910 growth of leader 
only, and for each succeeding year total height of tree. 


There is nothing in these figures, nor was there anything to be 
derived from inspection of the trees in orchard, to suggest the exist- 
ence of any marked difference between large buds and small buds in 
their value for purposes of propagation. The approximation of the 
growth curves of the classes here under consideration is, perhaps, more 
clearly indicated in the accompanying graphs platted from the 
measurements given (Figs. 1 to 6). The number of plants is small and 
therefore the basis for conclusions is less reliable than if the number 
were greater. However, careful study of the trees from year to year 
strengthens the belief that an increase in the number of trees would 
tend towards nearer coincidence of the lines rather than towards their 
greater separation. 

With Yellow Transparent, only one tree of which remained in 
each of the two groups, the tree from large bud was in advance of the 
tree from small bud in the three early years. In the fourth year it fell 
behind the tree from small bud and remained in this position for the 
two following years. In the seventh year it again took the lead by a 
narrow margin, but the last year it again fell slightly behind. Olden- 
burg, of which there were five trees from large buds and nine from 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 187 


small buds, except for a slight advantage on the part of trees from 
small, buds in the third year, showed a greater-average growth of the 
trees from large buds than of those from small buds thru the sixth 
year. In the seventh year trees from small buds gained a slight ad- 
vantage over those from large buds and this was maintained thru the 
eighth year. Grimes, with six trees in each group, showed a slightly 
better average growth by trees from large buds than by trees from 
small buds. With Winesap, having six trees from large buds and four 
from small buds, the trees from small buds had a slight advantage from 
the third to the seventh year and in the eighth year dropped slightly 
below the trees from large buds, but the lines thruout are so nearly 
parallel that neither group can be regarded as superior to the other. 
Ben Davis trees, with six in each group, showed a slight advantage on 
the part of those from small buds. 

Combining the varieties and platting the average growth of the 
24 trees from large buds with that of the 26 from small buds, there 
appears such close coincidence in the lines as to indicate no appreciable 
difference in value between large buds and small buds for purposes of 
propagation. A large bud may make a stronger initial growth than a 
small one, but the supply of nutrients in either bud will be quickly 
exhausted; then, which takes precedence in growth will depend, not 
upon the original size of the bud, but upon ‘which has the larger store 
of reserve food materials in adjacent parts, or which is the better sup- 
plied from the stock upon which it is grafted, subject, of course, to 
other factors which may influence the availability of the reserve food 
supply. 

Individual trees from large buds and from small buds for each of 
the three varieties Ben Davis, Grimes, and Winesap are shown in 
Figs. 7 to 12, which are from photographs made in July, 1915. Close 
proximity of trees in some cases restricted positions and interfered 
with absolutely uniform camera distance. This resulted in some slight 
inaccuracies in relative size, and for this reason height of tree as meas- 
ured October 13, 1915, accompanies each plate. 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [June, 


188 


100 — 
G0 ———- Tree trom Large Bud 7 
——-—-— Tree from Smal! Bud / 
he my 
. ] 
// 
i 
70 
Wy 
si 
/ 
@ 60 ; / 
= AAS 
S i A 
| 50 
‘ AL 
re) Fas 
< 
40 ; 
= CF ai 
4g 
¢ 
20% / 
WN ale 
AS i 
/0 ae ase 
\--"7 
ii2. 193 1914  /915 


O 

Years 1908 1909 /H0 911 

Fic. 1—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM LARGE BupsS AND FROM 
SMALL Bups: YELLOW TRANSPARENT, 1,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1908 and 1909 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and 
branches, in 1910 by the length of leader only, and in 1911 to 1915 by the total 


height. 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 . 189 


100 
90 7 ; 
Trees from Large Buds f 
----Trees from Smal! Buds ip 
60 ] 
/ 
y) 
7, 
/ 
: 70 Z 
. WA 
© \Y / 
/ 
S LA 
| 7. 
< ZL: 
< j 
>: :30 3 
: eee —| Pi 
S 1 Fag : 
“ 40 i741 
2 i ‘e 
x ry 
S45 if 
L sd 
x 


a 
A t 
2 a / ’ 
x. “ 
‘, ih 
20 ao 
VA “se / 
7 Say [f 
7 par @ 
/ 2 


= ; 
Years 1908 /909 1910 /9/1 19/2 1915 19/4 IWS 


Fig. 2.—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM LARGE BUDS AND FROM 
SMALL Bups: OLDENBURG, 1,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1908 and 1909 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and 
branches, in 1910 by the length of leader only, and in 1911 to 1915 by the total 


height. 


[ June, 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES 


190 
100 | 7 / 
Trees trom Large Buds / 
-——-- Trees frorm Smal// Buds / 
90 » FS ee 
AV} 
f 
80 7 
Raf 
70 / ra 
© 7. ] 
< / 
1S) Bee 4 : 
icc i 
‘ 60 ra 
| VA ) 
< LZ E 
»_ V4 
S Vae 
og 7 
S Lf ae 
~ Y 
S 40 fA 
i) / ¢ 
S Lf 
S f; 
> 30 ti 
=x if 
H 
20 —— \ if 
igs, © < é 
rae (\s, 4 
1 hy 
10 Sy 
49/0 49/1 1912 19/35 19/4 19/5 


Oo 
Years 1908 1909 
Fig. 3.—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM LARGE BuDS AND FROM 
SMALL Bups: GRIMEs, 1,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1908 and 1909 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and 
1910 by the length of leader only, and in 1911 to 1915 by the total 


branches, in 
height. 


191 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 
/20 : 
ine Trees from Large Buds // 
---- Trees fromm Sma// Buds i 
‘4 
/00 : / 
Z f 
Y 
Vi 
re) 8O vy 
G YA 
< Y 
iS Ky 
“70 7 
| / 
B Vi 
S 60 7) 
N Y | 
S H 
Me: 
8 50 
% Vg 
S) 
f 
S ° { 
= 
j 
Roba i 
\ f 
20 i a i 
: =a i 
yi 
19/1 1912 IAS IW4A 19/5 


O 
Years 1908 1909 
SMALL Bups: WINESAP, 1,000 SrRIEs 
Growth in 1908 and 1909 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and 


1910 
Fic. 4,—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM LARGE BUDS AND FROM 
branches, in 1910 by the length of leader only, and in 1911 to 1915 by the total 


height. 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [June, 


192 
110 ] 
: : / 
pe —Trees from Large Buds i 
----Trees from Smal! Buds | fi) 
rae 7 
90 Yes 
“7 
LL 
LY) 
/\/ 
% 70 / 
Sy cay 
2 ee 
aS y 
| 60 Ps 7 
< Z M4 
= aes 
© 50 tL 
S Wt 
& Hh 
pe if 
> i! ‘ 
< i 
30 
aN i 
N\ i 
20 = — 
\ : 
10 Wi 


O 
Years1908 1909 1910 9/1 12 IWS 1914 1/5 
Fic. 5.—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM LARGE Bups AND FRCM 
SMALL Bubs: Ben Davis, 1,000 SERIES 
Growth in 1908 and 1909 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and 
branches, in 1910 by the length of leader only, and in 1911 to 1915 by the total 
Leight. 


1918] BuLueTIN No. 211 193 


/ 
/00 
Average of 24 Trees from Large Buds 
---—Average of 26 Trees trom Small Buds / 
90 4 
/} 
/i / 
80 va 
Wf 
Le | 
70 A 
% ms 
g VA 
& 60 7, 4 
SS 
VA 
< Y | 
= 50 WH 
C 6 4 
6 Pig 
~ I 
9 40 HH 
C i] 
L 30 
* i 


tf 
i Ny 


oO 
Year 1908 1909 1910 19/1 19/2 IWS 1914 IWS 


Fig. 6.—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM LARGE BUDS AND FROM 
SMALL BUDS: THE FIVE VARIETIES COMBINED, 1,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1908 and 1909 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and 
branches, in 1910 by the length of leader only, and in 1911 to 1915 by the total 
height. a 


194 APPLE-BUD SELECTION; SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


oa ERS 
Sig irs 
agk Stes 


=) ¥ 


Fig. 7.—No. 1085: Ben Davis From Large Bup 
HeieHT, OcTOBER 13, 1915, 9 Feer. PHOTOGRAPHED JULY 13, 1915 


1918] BuLuetTIn No. 211 : 195 


| 


es a 


Fie. 8.—No. 1093: BEN Davis rrom SMALL Bup 
HEIGHT, OcToBER 13, 1915, 10 Feet. PHoToGRAPHED JuLY 13, 1915 


196 APPLE-BUD SELECTION; SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


Fie. 9.—No. 1047: Grimes FRoM LARGE Bup 
HEIGHT, OcToBEeR 13, 1915, 8 Feet, 1 IncH. PHoTogRAPHED JULY 14, 1915 


_ 1918] BULLETIN No. 211 ; 197 


Fie. 10.—No. 1051: Grimes FRoM SMALL Bup 
EIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 7 Fret, 2 INcHES. PHOTOGRAPHED JULY 14, 1915 


198 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


° 


ara. 


A 


tex, 


Fig. 11.—No. 1068: WINESAP FROM LARGE Bup 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 10 FEET, 6 INCHES. PHOTOGRAPHED JULY 14, 1915 


199 


BULLETIN No. 211 


1918] 


WINESAP FROM SMALL Bubp 


HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 9 Feet, 11 INCHEs. 


Fie, 12.—No. 1073 


PHOTOGRAPHED JULY 14, 1915 


& 


200 APPLE-BUD SELECTION; SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [June, 


Other Factors Affecting Growth of Trees 


_. In general it would seem that plumpness and healthy appearance 
of the scion shoot should offer a better basis upon which to judge value 
ior purposes of propagation than does size of buds. 

In each of the years 1912, 1913, 1914, and 1915, an inspection of 
the trees in this serfes was made, from which judgment was recorded 
as to grade, rating them as ‘‘good,’’ ‘‘fair,’’ and ‘‘poor.’’ The results 
are shown in Table 4. . 


TaBLe 4.—GRraADEs oF TREES FROM LARGE Bups AND FROM. SMALL Bups: ~ 
1,000 Srmrtes 


Number of trees 
1912 - 1913 1914 aaa 403 63) 


|Good| Fair| Poor |Good| Fair} Poor |Good | Fair} Poor |Good | Fair| Poor 


Large buds..| 7 | 12 | 5 10} 12} 2 20} 2] 2 22 |) 1 1 
Small buds..;| 8 | 12] 6 |. 11 | 12] 3 15| 9] 2 23 | 2) .1 


These figures exhibit a rather striking improvement in quality 
with each succeeding year.. Trees from large buds rated as good 
jumped from 29 percent in 1912 to nearly 92 percent in 1915, and trees 
from small buds rated as good changed from 31 percent in 1912 to 88 
- percent in 1915. While five trees from large buds and six from small 
-. buds were rated as poor in 1912, only one from large bud and one from 
_ small bud were so rated in 1915. Further changes in the same direc- 

tion are expected in succeeding years. 
This expectation is based upon the aggregate of experiences, of the 
- past ten years, in growing apple root-grafts and apple seedlings on the 
black: soil of this locality. The top soil does not appear to be adapted - 


_. to the promotion of growth in young apple trees. Whether this is 


because of texture, deficiency in some essential food element, the pres- 
ence of some deleterious ingredient, or the presence or absence of 
some soil organism, is not known. The difficulty may be physical, 
chemical, or biological, surely one or all-of these factors, because 
it is habitually the case that newly planted root-grafts or transplanted 
seedlings make very unsatisfactory growth during the first, second, 
third, and sometimes fourth years. After the third or fourth year’ 
there is usually a very marked inerease in the annual growth inere- 
ment, which continues to augment until fruiting maturity is reached. 
It appears that a certain period is necessary for roots to penetrate to 
and become established in the subsoil, and that the subsoil supplies 
conditions more favorable to growth than those encountered in the top 
soil. This is only suggested as one possible cause for the behavior 
. observed. The subject is one that offers attractions as a field for 
’ Investigation. 


1918] Pe Buuietin No. 211 201 


THE 11,000 SERIES 


The 11,000 series, selected in 1910, consisted of 240 buds repre- 
senting twelve varieties. With ten of the varieties. all the losses oc- 
curred in the first year; with two varieties the losses oceurred in the ~ 
second year. No losses occurred after the second year in this series. 
With Rome the loss was total in, the second year, altho at the close of 
the first year nine trees were living in each group. Isham was reduced 


to one tree in each group at the end of the second year. Only one tree — 


each of Ben Davis and Twenty Ounce survived the first year, the Ben 
Davis a tree from large bud, the Twenty Ounce a tree from small bud. 
Living trees of other varieties ranged from three to nine in each group. 
’ At the end of the sixth year there were living 57 trees from large buds 
and 41 trees from small buds. Growth increments of trees from large _ 
buds compared with those of trees from small buds were almost iden- 
tical. Trees from large buds had a slight advantage in the first year, 
the increment was equal in three years, and differed by only one inch 
in the other two. The uniformity in growth of trees in the two groups 
_Was even more marked here than in the 1,000 series. 


THE 14,000 SERIES : 


The 14,000 series, selected in.1911, included 260 buds representing 
thirteen varieties. The losses in this series aggregated greater than in 
either of the other series in the test of size, and, instead of being con- 
fined to the first two years as in the 11,000 series, were distributed thru 
the five seasons. There were living in 1915, 39 trees from large buds, 
or 30 percent of the original selections, and 34 trees from small buds, 
or 20 percent. The small-bud groups of Fameuse and Willow were 
lost entirely, and those of Oldenburg and Isham were reduced to one 
tree each. The large-bud groups of Twenty Ounce and Huntsman were 
also reduced. to one tree each. The curve of average growth for all 
varieties shows that the two groups made equal growth in the first 
year, that for the second year the small-bud group gained a slight ad- 
vantage, then dropped slightly below in the third year and remained 
below in the two following years, altho exhibiting a tendency to greater 
growth that promised to bring the two groups to equality in another 
year, : 


DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 


In the three series of trees here considered in detail there were, in 
1915, 221 trees living in orchard. Of these, 120 were grown from large 
buds and 101 from small buds. Divided according to age, 24 from 
large buds and 26 from small buds were eight years old, 57 from large 
buds and 41 from small buds were six years old, and 39 from large 
buds and 34 from small buds were five years old. 


202 APPLE-BUD espana di SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [June, 


In the fall of 1915 the trees were carefully inspected and classified 
as follows: 


Large buds Small ide 
RWOOME ii ek Lx seth gece eee ined & ike nies 77 65 
MIE Sig 03k Sc Dep he aa ean eS 31 25 
POE Se ies o.l Sas Se ae Fa Oe ee 12. 11 


The percentages are very nearly the same for the two groups— 
approximately 65 percent good, 25 percent fair, and 10 percent poor. 
Here, as in every other comparison attempted between trees from large 
buds and those from small buds, there were no tangible differences by 
which the two groups could be separated. 

Individual growth differences between trees within groups, as has. 
already been mentioned, were in some cases extreme. Thus, nine 

‘Oldenburg trees of the 1,000 series grown from small buds, had, at the 
close of the eighth year, a height range from 36 inches to 127 inches— 
the tallest more than three and one-half times the height of the shortest. 
The companion group of five trees of Oldenburg from large buds had 
an individual range from 62 inches to 104 inches; in this group the 
shortest would have to be increased by nearly 68 pereent to make it 
equal the tallest. Other similar. groups of the same series showed 
differences requiring additions to the shortest of from 21 to 55 percent 
to make them equal the tallest. 

The comparisons that have been given ebeeen trees propagated 
from large buds and those propagated from small buds, together with 
the aggregate of impressions derived from careful inspections of trees 
of all groups, leave no question regarding conclusions. The only pos- 
sible conclusion from the summarized data is that there are no differ- 
ences in value, for purposes of propagation, between buds of large size 
and those of small size. 


COMPARATIVE VALUE OF Bubs FROM DIFFERENT LOCATIONS ON TREE | 


Investigations were made in an attempt to determine whether or 
not there are differences in value, for purposes of propagation, between 
buds taken from different parts of the tree. Five classes of buds, all 
from mature trees, were determined upon as representative of possible 
differences that might arise from exposure or situation. These were 
as follows: 


1. Terminal buds from central terminal shoots 
2. Terminal buds from extreme lateral shoots on south side of tree in full 
. exposure to sun 
3. Terminal buds from extreme lateral shoots en north side of tree and for the 
most part shaded 
4. Terminal buds from short interior branches 
5. Terminal buds or scions from centrally located water sprouts 


The same procedure as that adopted for.the test of size was used ; 
that is, ten buds were chosen to represent each of the five groups for 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 203 


each variety, and as many varieties were used as time for the work 
allowed. Scions were grafted on ordinary apple- seedling stocks and 
the grafts were handled according to common practice with root-grafts. 
The one departure from this practice was in one series of 1909, where 
the buds, instead of being selected and grafted in late winter, were ~ 
chosen and budded on seedling stocks in August. 

For the sake of uniformity, the attempt was made to. include only 
terminal buds, and this was with few exceptions carried out for three 
of the variety groups, but in the two remaining variety groups diffi- 
culty was encountered, especially in regard to buds from. water | 
sprouts. With some varieties water sprouts were absent, and when 
they were present it was frequently the case that terminal buds had 
not been formed, or, if formed, they had gone into the winter in such 
an immature condition that they were destroyed by even moderate 
freezing. Where water-sprout tips had been injured, the uninjured 
lateral buds nearest the extremity of the shoots were chosen. Where 
short interior branches were present, there was usually no difficulty 
in obtaining terminal buds, but some varieties did not possess branches 
such as were desired for this group and in these cases the group was 
of necessity omitted. 

The work of selecting and measuring buds was begun in the 
spring of 1908, and additions were made in each of the three seasons . 
following. Locating the position and recording the dimensions of the 
buds established individuality for each, and for purposes of identifica- 


tion at any time thruout the life of the prospective tree, some designa- 


tion was necessary that should be inseparable from the individual until 
the tree was permanently planted and its position accurately platted 
in permanent record. This identity of individuals was secured by a 
system of numbering. The buds selected in any one season constituted 
what has been called a ‘‘series.’’? Thus the ‘‘2,000 series’? was com- 
posed of 450 buds from five varieties selected and root-grafted in 1908 ; 
the ‘‘7,000 series’’ included 290 buds from six varieties selected and 
budded in August, 1909; the ‘‘9,000 series,’’ 840 buds from twelve 
varieties selected and grafted in 1910; and the ‘‘12,000 series,’’ 530 
buds from eleven varieties selected and grafted in 1911. In each series 
the individual numbers were from one up. Thus the ten terminal buds 
on top central shoots of Ben Davis bore the numbers 2,001 to 2,010, 
the ten terminal buds from lateral shoots south, the numbers 2,011 to 
2,020, and so on thru the series. On painted wooden labels about two 
inches long and one-quarter inch wide, notched at both ends, the num- 
bers were painted with shellac and lampblack, and a label with number 
corresponding to the number in the descriptive record of the bud was 
attached, when the graft was made, by a copper wire band at each end. 
After the grafts were planted in nursery in strictly numerical order 
it was necessary to remove the labels, but this was not done until stake 


204 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


labels for each group of ten were in place and the whole planting had 
been carefully checked with a previously prepared record. In the fall, 
if the plants were to be lifted for winter Borage, the labels were again ~ 
~ adjusted. 

This matter of individual labels for several hundred a plants 
may appear as a simple detail, but in reality it was the most important, 
and, at the same time, the most exacting procedure in connection with 
the test undertaken. If the identity of a plant is lost, the plant is of — 
no value and must be discarded ; not only is the labor expended upon 
it lost, but the value of the ultimate results of the experiment are more 
or less imperiled, because in any such experiment, numbers have 
weight and any decrease in numbers diminishes by a definite amount 
the value of final results. Therefore effort expended in devising and 
applying means of insuring permanent identity for individuals is 
; imperative. 


LOSSES IN THE VARIOUS SERIES 


In this test of buds from different locations on the trees the aggre- 
gate of buds selected, measured, and propagated was 2,110, divided 
unequally among fifteen varieties. Nearly 70 percent of the buds were 
from the five varieties Ben Davis, Winesap, Oldenburg, Yellow Trans- 
parent, and Grimes, for the reason that these varieties, being most 
readily available, were represented in all the series, while the others 
appeared in only one or two of the later series and were, in large part, 
from seleeted trees in orchards in the southern part of the state. The 
varieties thus represented by smaller numbers were Jonathan, Arkan- 
sas Black, Kinnard, Minkler, ce Whitney, Fameuse, Rome, 
_ Willow, and Isham. 

Altho careful attention was given to all details of propagation and 
storage thru the interval between grafting and planting in nursery, 
the losses during the first season were heavy with all series, particu- 
larly with the 7,000 series, which was budded in August, 1909. In 
this series the loss resulted chiefly from failure of the buds to take, and 
this failure is ascribed to extreme drouth during and following the 
budding season. In the grafted series a considerable share of the loss 
occurred by reason of failure of chosen buds to vegetate, but this source 
of loss was not so pronounced as in the budded series. With all series 
-losses occurred thru the breaking of young shoots by storms, and thru 
depredations by cutworms, mice, and rabbits. The number of living 
plants in the various series, after growing one year in nursery, is shown 
in Table 5. 

Losses continued to occur in succeeding seasons, due in part to 
winter injury, in part to the death of weak individuals that had made 
- but feeble growth from the beginning, and in part to accidents result- 
ing from wind. The total number of living trees in 1915 was 734, 


1918] | pee ae Buuierin No. 211 2 2 205 


representing approximately 35 percent of the 2,110 buds selected. 
They were distributed as shown in Table 5. 


TaBiE 5.—LocaTion oF Bup oN TREE: ENDURANCE OF TREES, BY SERIES 


Trees living after one year in|Trees living at close of eighth 
Series Brees ss atte beseSEoae 
Percentage| Age Percentage 
selected Year |Number |" of total (years) Number |" ¢¢ total 
2 000 450 1908 .278 61.77 8 129 28.66 
7 000 290 1909 64. 22.06 6 23 7.93 
9 000 . 840 1910 561 66.78 6 436 51.90 
12 000 | 530 1911 226 42.64 5 146 27.54 


ENDURANCE OF TREES BY VARIETAL GROUPS 


Classification of the trees according to varieties is not wholly satis- 
factory because of differences in age and in nymbers of buds selected, 
but for purposes of record the status of the varieties as to number of 
trees living in November, 1915, together with the percentage of the 
original selections, is given in Table 6; the varieties are arranged in 
sequence from the higher to the lower percentages. 


Taste 6.—LocaTion oF Bup: on TREE: ENDURANCE OF TREES, BY VARIETIES 


No.” of Buds Trees living after eight years 

Variety selected _ Number ge hey 
Minkler ssc acc eee 50 36 72.00 
Arkansas Black......:... 30 20 66.66 
Wihtttie yes fo eer es 80 46 57.50 
Willow sit, ec eee ie ees 50 25 50.00 
Bameuses 36 :5)206.0 ew Pee - 100 46 46.00 
CHAOE, Silos oe eawaet 310 141 45.48 
PTUMCSINATIN ee ears oats (90 36 40.00 
Oldenburg) Eis awielkes Ss: 260 84 32.30 
PUUATS cies se pees Vee 50 16 “32.00 
TMA orcs sheet pepe oe 50 16 32.00 
Winesapece. ia eet et 2" 290 90 31.038 
Beh Davids «eens otis. 320 97 30.31 
PROMO ie en seen eae 50 12 24.00 
Jonathan. estes 140 30 21.42 
Yellow Transparent....... 240 48 20.00 


The higher percentages here fall to varieties having few buds and 
representation in but one or, at most, two of the series in which the 
trees were in part six years old and in part five years old. The five 
varieties Grimes, Oldenburg, Winesap, Ben Davis, and Yellow Trans- 
parent were all represented in each of the four series and together 
represented over 67 percent of the buds selected and about 62 percent 
of living trees. They give a basis for judging endurance that is per- 
haps better than that given by the complete list of varieties. Per- 


206 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES — [June, 


centages of trees of these varieties living in the fall of 1915, or after 
eight years, ranged from 45.48 percent for Grimes to 20 percent for 
Yellow Transparent. Other percentages are 32.3 for Oldenburg, 31.03 
for Winesap, and 30.31 for Ben Davis. The average for the five varie- 
ties is 31.82 percent. _ ; 

Eliminating the 7,000 series, in which budding was substituted 
for grafting and wherein failure of buds to start resulted in very few 
trees, and considering the three grafted series only, it may be noted 
that there were differences in these series that were in the nature of 
seasonal differences. Thus, for the 2,000 series, of 1908, Oldenburg led 
with 35 percent of the buds selected persisting as trees in the fall of 
1915. Ben Davis and Grimes were equal) and followed a little below 
Oldenburg; Winesap followed next, and last Yellow Transparent with 
only 15.5 percent of the buds represented as living trees. For the 
9,000 series, of, 1910, Grimes was far in the lead in number of living 
trees, nearly 70 percent of the selected buds being represented by 
trees; this was followed by Oldenburg, Yellow Transparent, Winesap, 
and Ben Davis in the order named. In the 12,000 series, of 1911, 
Grimes was again in the lead, but with a much lower percentage than - 
‘that shown in the 9,000 series. This was followed by Winesap and 
Yellow Transparent in descending order and then by equal values for 
Ben Davis and Oldenburg. “In general, Grimes proved the most satis- 
factory; the other four varieties followed in this order: Oldenburg, 
Winesap, Ben Davis, and Yellow Transparent. 


ENDURANCE OF TREES FROM BUDS GROUPED ACCORDING TO 
LOCATION ON TREE 


The endurance of grafted buds having been considered as. ex- 
pressed in percentage of living trees, when grouped by varieties, exam- 
ination may now be made of the behavior of the same selected buds as | 
expressed when grouped according to location on tree. Using the 
five varieties represented in each of the three series propagated by 
grafting, the aggregate of buds selected was 1,180. The number rep- 
resented by living trees at the end of the first year was 670, or 57 per- 
- cent, and in the fall of 1915 there remained 430 living trees, which rep- 
resented 36.5 percent of the buds selected. In Table 7 are shown the 
number of living trees arranged according to location of the buds from 
which they were propagated. 

Here trees from buds from short interior branches led by a small 
margin in percentage of trees living. After eight years the percent- 
age of trees living in this group was 44.28, followed by trees from 
top central buds with 43.84 percent living; trees from extreme lateral 
buds on north side came next with 34.61 percent living; then came 
the group of trees from extreme lateral buds on south side with 31.15 
percent living, and last trees from buds from water sprouts with 27.36 


4918)...” BuLuetTIn No. 211 : 207 


percent living. Considering the four series separately, the groups of 
trees in no two series had the same order of ascendency .in this matter 
of percentage of living trees. Trees from top central buds oceupied . 
first place in three series and took third place in the fourth; trees 
from extreme lateral buds from south side had second place in one, 
third place in two, and fourth place in one; trees from extreme lateral 
buds from north side had third place in two and fourth in) two; trees 
from buds from short interior branches had first place in one, second 
place in two, and third place in one; while trees from buds from water 
sprouts occupied second place in one, fourth place in one, and fifth 
place in two. Of the five locations from which buds were chosen, buds 
from no one location produced trees that exhibited any marked or 
constant advantage over others in percentage of living trees at the end 
of eight years. 
’ 


TABLE 7.—ENDURANCE OF TREES FROM Bups GRouUPED ACCORDING TO 
LOCATION ON TREE 


No. of Trees living fall of Trees living after 
Location of buds buds first year eight years 

selected | Number |Percentage| Number | Percentage 
Top central .......... 260 162 62.30. 114 43.84 
Lateral south ........ ~ 260 140 53.84 81 31.15 
Lateral north ....... ; 260 135 51.92 90 34.61 
Short interior ........ 210 139 = |j 66.19 93 44.28 
Water sprouts ....... 190 94 49.47 52 27.36 


GROWTH THE ONLY BASIS FOR COMPARISON 


For determination of possible differences between trees produced 
from buds from different locations on the tree, the only available basis 
is the recorded measurements of yearly increments, or better, because 
more practicable, the two dimensions indicated by total height and 
spread. When this test was begun it was proposed to measure and 
record all growth made by each tree. The sum of growth of leader 
and of all lateral shoots was recorded.as the growth of the tree for the 
particular year. This plan was carried out for two seasons with each 
series, but the impracticability of the method soon became apparent. 
Each additional year multiplied the number of shoots and the labor | 
involved in making the measurements soon made a change of plan 
imperative. For the third season of the experiment, only the growth 
of the leader of each tree was recorded. At this stage another factor 
came in to modify greatly the form and dimensions of trees. Pruning 
_ became a necessity in order to insure future symmetry and correct 
habit of trees. Most trees required removal of branches to enable 
formation of the head at proper height. Some demanded cutting back 
of too vigorous leaders, and in the interest of symmetry, rampant 
laterals required shortening. Application of this treatment, looking 
to good form, was in most cases coincident with removal from nursery 


208 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES - [ June, 
to orchard where the trees are planted 15 by 15 feet to remain until the 
end of the test. After planting in orchard, four measurements,— 
namely, total height, spread, and diameter and length of trunk, were 
recorded, together with notes regarding the amount of branching and 
general vigor. Without going into details of the measurements of 
each year, data showing the height and spread of the five varieties 
having representation in the three grafted series are given as recorded 
at the end of the season of 1915, segregating these series because of age 
differences (Table 8). 


TaBLe 8.—Location or Bup on TrEE: SHOWING GROWTH OF TREES, BY 
VARIETIES, Fatt or 1915 


‘ Average (inches) 
Variety No. of trees ~ Height Spread 
The 2,000 Series, Trees Eight Years Old 
SO RIDVIE = So wis eee a ee 35 110.08 90.65 
SC NG Cana SR i 25 110.68 97.32 
Oldonburw 6) PS 28 112.60 58.85 
Yellow Transparent....... 14 92.00 — 37.42 
ROR os ics wy shp coe ie obs 31 106.90 89.87 
The 9,000 Series, Trees Six Years Old 
Gi ot See te eae 2 53 81.78 54.05 
Winesap...... BTA ee 3 ‘ 39 86.74 57.43 
EL OST gage ora aN SD 47 83.08 39.46 - 
Yellow Transparent...... 22 74.77 25.95 
WOR eck. cS aa pees 90 85.85 - 65.51 
The 12,000 Series, Trees Five Years Old 

Ben Davis ........ Pu 2:5 8 62.62 34.30 
WE MADRE: 5 ii 8s".a a te 14 64.21 38 .07 
SOS) aaa ee Se 8 57.25 25.12 
Yellow Transparent....... 9 57.55 12.44 
RPP his os, ee eS 15 52.60 35.40 
Combining the three series, ignoring age differences, the varieties range as below: 
GOON BVI. es ea Po ek 96 90.47 64.21 
WNERGAD 05S ART 78 90.37 72.00 
Olden urge 5. eh. dee hoes 83 101.39 44.63 
Yellow Transparent....... 45 78.91 26.82 
CEUDER Shee il cei ose hoes 136 86.98 67.74 


In both height and spread Ben Davis was slightly in advance of 
Grimes, but the differences were no greater than would be expected 
between varieties following their normal characteristics. Oldenburg 
and Yellow Transparent showed less spread than the other varieties 
because of the naturally more erect habit. 

Arranging the 438 trees of these five varieties according to the - 
locations from which the buds were taken and segregating the three 
series as before, the tabulation showing number of trees and average 
height and spread appears in Table 9. 


1918] Buiter No. 211 209 


TABLE 9.—LocATION oF Bup ON TREE: SHOWING GROWTH OF TREES OF THE 
Five VARIetTIEs, BY Series, Fatt or 1915 


2,000 series 9,000 series 12,000 series 

. No. | Average | No. Average No. Average 

Location of buds | “| “(nches) | of | (inches) | op |. (inches) 
trees |Height|Spread| trees |Height|Spread| trees | Height|Spread 
Top central ....... 39 |110.82) 84.87] 64 | 84.95)°55.00) 10 | 58.50} 23.00 
Lateral south ...:.} 21 |108.00) 71.23) 57 | 84.56) 55.33) 11 | 56.63) 28.09 
Lateral north ..... 30 |105.60) 72.36) 56 | 84.71) 55.19) 4 | 61.25) 39.25 
Short interior ..... 25 |112.08} 84.24) 56.| 82.60) 56.35} 14 | 60.14) 28.00 
Water sprouts..... 18 |100.83| 75.22} 18 | 80.98} 49.83] 15 | 58.66} 37.53 


Reducing this tabulation to a single expression by combining the 
trees of different ages, in order to facilitate comparison of growth from 
buds from the different locations, Table 10 is given as a condensed 
result of the last measurements made. A 


TaBLE 10.—Location or Bup oN TREE: CoMPARISON OF GROWTH OF TREES 
OF THE THREE SERIES COMBINED, AS- MEASURED IN THE Fat or 1915 


Average (inches 
Location of buds No. of trees Height ge ( = ead 
Top central: 6... 5055.06. 113 91.54 . 62.47 
Lateral south... .......00. 89 86.64 55.71 
Lateral norsh 5 223): sc es 90 ' 90.63 . 60.21 
Short interior: ss. Se ee 95 87.05 59.51 
Water sprouts............ 61 81.41 55.17 


The foregoing gives the results to November, 1915, for five of the 
varieties in the three series propagated by grafting and points to a 
close approximation in the development of trees from buds from the 
different locations. Tabulations in detail for each variety show no . 
regularity in sequence of locations when arranged in order on the basis 
of total height of the trees. In some eases trees from buds from short 
interior branches showed greatest: growth, in others trees from buds 
from water sprouts were in ascendency, and in still others the trees 
from buds from central terminal shoots had first place. In no ease, 
however, was there any marked or significant departure from the gen- 
eral trend shown by the trees when grouped either by varieties or by 
the locations from which buds were taken. The cases of maximum 
departures from the general average were with single varieties, in 
single series, where the number of trees was small. Grouping single 
varieties within a series, or combining the series, either by varie- 
ties or by bud location, has immediate effect in smoothing out and 
bringing growth curves into close approximation. In all computations 
the effect of numbers is strikingly shown, and apparently it would 
require only small additions to bring the results to absolute zero, thus 
demonstrating conclusively that for purposes of propagation it 
makes no difference from what position on the tree the bud is taken. 


210 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [June, 


-To illustrate further the results of this test of buds from different 
locations, the following tabulations and graphs are presented. Each 
tabulation with its accompanying graph stands for one complete series 
in which the trees were of equal age. In Table 11 is presented the 
growth record for eight years for the 2,000 series, which included five 
varieties, and in Fig. 13 the same data are presented graphically. It 
would be more satisfactory and the curves in all probability would be 
more nearly coincident if the numbers of trees for the various locations 
were equal, but even as it is there is remarkable uniformity in the 
development of the trees from buds from the different locations. The 
‘7,000 series, propagated, as already explained, by budding, and includ- 
ing six varieties, sustained such heavy losses that the number of trees 
remaining was too small for satisfactory comparison; however, even 
here-the departures from the general trend of development were not 
great, as is shown in Table 12 and in Fig. 14. The 9,000 series included 
twelve varieties and was started with 840 selected buds; Table 13 and 
Fig. 15 show the growth for six seasons of the 436 remaining trees. 
Greater uniformity in the distribution of trees in location groups would 
doubtless have given curves that more nearly coincided, but as it is, 
there is close approximation in the growth of the different groups. 
. The 12,000 series began with 530 buds distributed among eleven varie- 
ties; in Table 14 and in Fig. 16 are given the growth records of 146 
trees for five years, and here there is shown a more nearly equal dis- 
tribution in the location groups. 

Figs. 17 to 32 illustrate some of the trees of the 2,000 series, test- 
ing buds from different locations on the tree. These plates are all from 
. photographs made in July, 1915. 


1918] ; . Buwtermn No. 211 211 


Taste 11 pape oF Bup on Tree: 2,000 Sinicas, SHOWING GrowTH OF 
TREES OF ALL VARIETIES ComBINED 


(Expressed in inches) 
Year | 1908 | 1909 [| 1910 | 1911 | 1912 | i913 | 1914 | 1915 
Top Central: Average of 39 Trees 
FIGRHB So. ee on da veh es fee 20. pee 18 |. 10 44 | 54 68 | 84 | 111 
Peer weer er 2 30 44 58 85 
- Lateral South Side: Shas of 21 Trees 
Height....... ee te. | 18 | 21 10 | 43 | 52 | 67 | 85 | 108 
Bitttad eS soa: Sk See ae we a 24 36 | 50 | 70 
Lateral North Side: Average of 30 Trees ee 
Heignt.4 os cane es | 18 | ae y'$ 9 | 41 | 52 | 66 82 - | 105 | 
ORORG. i. skp ene es ais ‘fa sie 25 36 47 71 
Short, Interior: ees of 25 Trees 
i A ERR Sener ey: Ee 18 aia 16. ban 42 | 53 | 69 87 | VIZ - 
Spread eye Pe ‘es 28 |- 42 56 84 
Water Sprouts! Avera of 18 Trees 
Taehit.§ Gis. eae ee a 18 Be 15 fe 39 51 | 64 | 79 | 101 
Sppeadsi so eanecdck ee ee 25 39 65 75 


Norre.—Total growth is ‘pesonded for 1908 and 1909, for 1910 length of leader 
only, and for each succeeding year total height of tree. 


TABLE. 12,—Location or Bup on TREE: 7,000 Srriss, SHOWING GrowTH OF . 
TREES OF ALL VARIETIES CoMBINED 


(Expressed in inches) 
Year | 1910 | 1911 J} 1912 | 1913 | 1914 | 1915 


Top Central: Average of 7 Trees 
Hatenb oh e e asa ee | 21 | Er 41 | -51 | 63 | 86 
LT tt Rete. AERC Roa Se Op. ay ty 17 33 57 
Lateral South Side: Average of 5 Trees 
Height iio Sn Ca o's cians 30 7 43 | 52 66 | . 92 
Spread as sae a yee « 99 BR 63 
: Lateral North Side: Average of 4 Trees 
) <P ne eee | 24 | 6 40 54 | 69 94 
Spread 3. heise ens x ets “F e a 26 43 74 
Short Interior: Kverigs of 4 Trees 
Height 5c. phe Pe 21 4° | 35 | 46. | 65 85 
Spread sas ii ‘es 16 29 49 
Water Barouia: Average of 3 Trees 
PRORENA co ire-s ach hiss bet 25 | 8 43 | 47 60 85 
BpIGae iki kes ashe oe oh 14 36 67 


Nors.—Total growth is recorded for 1910, for 1911 length of leader only, and 
for each succeeding year total height of tree. 


212 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES - [June, 


Tasie 13.—LocatTion or Bup on Tree: 9,000 Szrizs, SHowiNG GROWTH OF 
TREES OF ALL VARIETIES COMBINED 


_ (Expressed in inches) 
Year. | 1910 y 1911 | 1912 | 1913 | 1914 | 1915 
Top Central: Average of 112 Trees 
OG. 3 cob oes oe oo | 19 9 41 49 | 64 | 88 
MUROEG ©. icin pacar 3 to cs a <i set 4 ips Bally 3 | 60 
Lateral South Side: Average of 102 Trees 
ea ee | 18 10 41 | . 49 65 | 88 
Spread........ Sep s wiah Swe $ a 18. 29 65 
Lateral North Side: Average of 92 Trees 
SS RE Coe eae aap ese 16 | 11 | 41 | 50 | 63 87 
C0 Bean ee Dior wey i oe yi 16 30 | 58 
Short Interior: Average of 84 Trees 
i MAGHEDG: 5's b.c's«ies's + otek | 15 12 | 36 | 44 | 60 | 83 
ee Se es és es as 17 30 55 
: Water Sprouts: Average of 46 Trees 
) | EE. aaa erae eer | 16 | 10 | .36 | 46 60 | 82 
WRONG «Pee S eee ss vs Py <i 15 29 59 


Nots.—Total growth is recorded for 1910, for 1911 length of leader only, and 
for each succeeding year total height of tree. 


. Taste 14.—Location or Bup on Tres: 12,000 Szrtes, Seowina GRowTH OF - 
TREES OF ALL VARIETIES COMBINED 


(Expressed in inches) 


Year “< e . SOE [> BONS 4 IS TO. E2018 
Top Central: Average of 26 Trees 
I SS aeeew ie | 7 | | elie | “25 | 37 56 
oh SEE nope ar we a = 9 26 
Lateral South Side: Average of 29 Trees 
Height. ks i ies 8: | 8 | 18 | 24 | 36 | 60 
1 Sa een eee ise et a“ 12 32 
Lateral North Side: Average of 29 Trees 
eT Sere re eee | 9 | 18 | 28 | 42 65 
oa SR nee a es ae =a 12 | 34 
Short Interior: Average of 28 Trees 
Reet a Pa a ay | 10 | - 18 | 29 | 41 | 64 
co , Bek ee rae Pare nf a Pa 12 34 
Water Sprouts: Average of 34 Trees 
PION Es catig coe io ares 9 | 19 | 30 | 41 64 
Barend 2. cc -5 ee fi re 3 15 | 38 


Notre.—Measurement for 1911 is given for length of leader only; for each 
succeeding year total height of tree is given. 


1918) BULLETIN No. 211 : 213 


bi | —— Jop flerminal F/ 
---- Lateral South Side i} 
| —— Lateral North Side /\, 
100 ~~~. Short Interior B 
—— Water Sprovis ~ Hh ; 
: i | ear) 
| y Y/ 
60 : 4 U 
ML 
< ra 
oO - 70 Q 
S U 
7 7, oa 
£ iy Wa 
i Vi 
‘s 50 
% 
S 40 
S 
<= 
30 
20 <a 
=] 
/0 
Ok fades sce 


Years 1908 1909 1910 IH s182. 193 181d IWS 


_ Fig. 13.—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM Bups SELECTED FROM DIFFERENT 
LOCATIONS ON TREE: ALL VARIETIES COMBINED, 2,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1908 and 1909 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and 
branches, in 1910 by the length of leader only, and in 1911 to 1915 by the total 
height. 


214 ' APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES (June, 


/00 , 
ai & —ép Terminal! : f 
_---Lateral South Side om / 
— —Laoferal North Side f 
= ---Short Interior . / 


 ——Woter Sprouts 


8 
“i 


8 
Ni 


§ 


Average of Growth— Inches 
3 
we 
N 


S 


Oo 
Years 190 ~—- 19) 192 19/3 1914 ° 1915 


Fig. 14—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM Bups SELECTED FROM DIFFERENT 
“LOCATIONS ON TREE: ‘ALL VARIETIES COMBINED, 7,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1910 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and branches, 
in 1911 by the length of leader only, and in 1912 to 1915 by the total height: 


215 


BULLETIN No. 21] 


1918) 
90 
| / 
— Tp Terminal We: 
| jateral South Side ‘ff 
i Lafera/ North Side f 
---— Shor? Inferior f/ 
in | —— Water Sprovrs y 
2 f 
& 7 
$ 60 7 y 
> f 
Y 
< V4, 
z ca Ye 
N LZ “Ye 
- 40\- VM 
5 “ 
i 
& BH 
§ 2 7 
~S ee 
~ “hr 
“2 af, 
10 KS ff 
i 
9l2. :1918.~=—«/9IAS*«SUS 


Oo 
Years 1910 19/1 
Fig. 15.—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM Bups SELECTED FROM DIFFERENT 
LOCATIONS ON TREE: ALL VARIETIES COMBINED, 9,000 SERIES 
Growth in 1910 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and branches, 
in 1911 by the length of leader only, and in 1912 to 1915 by the total height. 


216 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES { June, 


PSs | —Top Terminal 
---Laferal South Side 
__—Lateral North Side 


0 ~-- Short Interior ' 

x 7 |~— Wafer Sprouts vi 
La lf 
iS JA |, 
S 7 

& 30 if 

w 

5 
B 20 

X . 

g 

= DE 

/0 cram 


O H 
Years 19/1 = 1912-——CWS— ssi US 


Fic. 16.—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM Bups SELECTED FROM DIFFERENT 
LOCATIONS ON THE TREE: ALL VARIETIES COMBINED, 12,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1911 was measured by the length of leader only, and in 1912 to 
1915 by the total height. 


217 


BULLETIN No. 211 


1918] 


GRIMES FROM ToP TERMINAL Bup 


Fie, 17.—No. 2451 


HEIGHT, OcTOBER 13, 1915, 10 Fert, 2 INCHES 


[ June, 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES 


218 


Fig. 18—No. 2218: Grimes FRoM SoutH LATERAL Bup 


HEIGHT, OcTOBER 13, 1915, 9 Fret, 6 INCHES 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 219 


Fig. 19.—No. 2229: GrRimES FROM NorTH LATERAL Bup - 


HeigHt, Ocroper 13, 1915, 9 Freer, 9 INCHES 


20 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


Fig. 20.—No. 2235: GRIMES FROM Bubp FROM SHORT INTERIOR BRANCH 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 9 FEET, 1 INCH 


1918 | BuLLetIN No, 211 221° 


Fig. 21.—No. 2247: Grimes rrom Bup FROM WATER SPROUT 
HEIGHT, OcTOBER 13, 1915, 9 Freer, 11 INCHES 


222 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


Fie. 22.—No. 2009: Ben DaAvis From Top TERMINAL Bup 


HEIGHT, OcToBER 13, 1915, 10 Fert, 6 INCHES 


223 


BULLETIN No. 211 


1918] 


DAVIS FROM SoutH LATERAL Bubp 


BEN 


Fig, 23.—No. 2016 


HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 11 Fret, 2 INCHES 


tN 
we 
> 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES | June, 


Fig. 24.—No. 2109: OLDENBURG FROM Fig. 25.—No. 2111: OLDENBURG FROM 


Top TERMINAL Bup SoutH LATERAL Bup 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 8 Fret, HEIGHT, OcTOBER 13, 1915, 8 FEET 


3 INCHES 


1918] BuLLETIN No, 211 225 


Fia. 26.—No. 2122: OLDENBURG FROM NortTH LATERAL Bubp 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 10 FEET, 5 INCHES 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS. FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


Fie. 27.—No. 2137: OLDENBURG FROM Bubp FROM SHORT INTERIOR BRANCH 
HEIGHT, OcTOBER 13, 1915, 10 FEET, 9 INCHES 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 227 


Fic. 28.—No. 2052: WINESAP FROM ToP TERMINAL Bup 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 9 Frrr, 11 INcHES 


[ June, 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES 


228 


WINESAP FROM SourH LATERAL Bup 


2363: 
HEIGHT, OcToBER 13, 1915, 8 Fret, 8 INCHES 


29.—No. 


Fig. 


1918) BULLETIN No. 211 229 


Fie. 30.—No. 2078: WINESAP FROM NortTH LATERAL Bubp 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 8 Fert, 5 INCHES 


230 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [June, 


Fig. 31.—No. 2087: WINESAP FROM Bup FROM SHORT INTERIOR BRANCH 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 9 FrEtT, 9 INCHES 


231 


BULLETIN No. 211 


1918] 


- 


WINESAP FROM Bup FROM WATER SPROUT 


Fig. 32,—No. 2393 


HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 10 Fert, 7 INCHES 


232 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


COMPARATIVE VALUE OF BUDS FROM DIFFERENT LOCATIONS ON SHOOT 


The third division of the bud-selection project is a test for differ- 
ences in value, for purposes of propagation, of buds from different 
locations on the same shoot. Four locations are represented; namely, 
terminal buds, lateral buds at distal end of shoot, buds from middle 
of shoot, and buds from near the base of the shoot. As in the other 
divisions of the project, selections were made in series, extending over 
the four years 1908 to 1911. In three of the series propagation was by 
grafting. The.8,000 series of 1909 was propagated by budding in 
August of that year. The number of buds selected and their distribu- 
tion as to location are given in Table 15. ah 


TaBLeE 15.—Location oF Bup on SuHoor: SHowine DistRIBUTION oF Bups 


SELECTED ve 
Number of buds 

Sune Year | Terminal eee Middle | Near base Total 
3 000 1908 . ~ 80 80. 80 80 320 
8 000 1909 10 60 60 60 190 
10 000 1910 a, 150 150 150 450 
13 000 1911 110 oF Se LO 110 330 
Total . 200 290 ~ 400 400 1 290 


Fifteen varieties were represented. Ben Davis, Winesap, Olden- 
burg, Yellow Transparent, and Grimes appeared in all series; the other 
ten varieties appeared in one or both of the 10,000 and the 13,000 
series. Here, as in the test of location of buds on trees, many chosen 
buds failed to grow and some of those starting were lost thru accidents, 
so that the number of trees living in the fall of 1915 was much below 
the number of buds selected. Living trees classified according to the 
locations from which buds were taken for each series are given in 
Table 16. 


TaBLE 16.—LocatTion or Bup on SHoot: SHowenGe DistRIBuTION OF TREES 
Livine in 1915 


Number of trees Age of ES 
Series Terminal ear Ss Middle |Near base} (years) 
3 000 23 29 17 * < 
8 000 # 10 12 : : 
10 000 ” 64 74 48 : 
13 000 36 Soi ais 24 15 5 


Of the 384 trees living in 1915, about 25 percent were eight years 
old, nearly 56 percent were six years old, and about 20 percent were ~ 
five years old. Of the five varieties represented in all series, Ben Davis 
stood first in percentage of living trees with a percentage of 41. Grimes 
followed with 32.5 percent, Winesap with 29 percent, Oldenburg with 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 3 233 


20 percent, and Yellow Transparent with a little less than 18 percent. 
Arranging the trees of these five varieties according to the locations 
from which the buds were taken, it appears that, with Ben Davis and 


Winesap, the highest percentage of trees surviving was with those — 


from lateral buds from the distal ends of shoots; with Oldenburg and 
Yellow Transparent the highest percentage was with those from buds 
from the middle of shoots; while with Grimes the trees from termi- 
nal buds survived in greatest numbers. ; 

In general, the losses of trees from selected buds were greater with 
terminal buds and those near the base than with buds taken from cen- 
tral and distal portions of shoots. There appears no evident reason 
why losses should be greater with terminal buds than with central 
buds or lateral buds from the distal end; they were, in general, larger 
than buds from other situations, and so far as could be judged from 
external appearances, perfectly sound and healthy. It is possible that 
winter injury occurred sufficient to prevent growth, but insufficient to 
be externally apparent; this does not seem probable, however, because 
no general failure of terminal buds on trees from which buds were 
selected was observed. No wholly satisfactory reason for the failures 
that occurred suggests itself, but it is a fact that an unexpectedly large 
percentage of terminal buds failed to grow. 

In selecting buds near the bases of shoots, effort was made to take 
them from as near the base as possible and yet to preserve sufficient 
scion length for grafting. Scions were made as short as possible, vary- 
ing from two to four inches according to the length of the shoot. These 
basal scions were often of greater diameter than is desirable in scions. 
They were short, rigid, and often curved, and were adjusted to stocks 
with difficulty, and were easily displaced. It is probable, therefore, 
that a considerable portion of the losses in this group of buds should 
be ascribed to imperfections in the mechanical operations of grafting. 
However, observations upon the starting of grafts representing the 
four groups of buds convince the writer that buds near the bases of 
shoots do not start as readily nor as vigorously as do buds from the 
central portion of the shoot; neither do they equal.in vigor of initial 
growth those lateral buds situated just. below the terminal, altho this 
tardy and often weak start is in no sense a measure of subsequent 
grows 

GROWTH OF TREES 


Measurements of growth of trees in this test of buds from different 
locations on the shoot were taken in the same manner and on the same 
dates as were those in the test of buds from different locations on the 
tree. Comparing the measurements made in 1915, there appear the 
same irregularities in sequence of groups, when arranged in order of 
merit, and the same close approximations between the different groups 
under test, as were found in the groups from buds from different loca- 
tions on the tree. — 


234 . APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [June, © 


Examining the measurements by series and considering first the 
3,000 series, trees eight years old, it appears that trees from buds from 
middle of shoot and from near the basal.end were equal in height and 
stood first, followed in order by trees from lateral buds at distal end 
and trees from terminal buds. 

The 8,000 series, with trees six years old, had no trees from ter- 
minal buds. Trees from buds near the base took precedence in height, 
followed by trees from-buds near distal end, and then by trees from 
buds from middle of shoot. 

In the 10,000 series, also with six-year-old trees, and also with no 
trees representing terminal buds, trees from buds from distal end took 
the lead in height, while those from buds near base and from middle 
of shoot were of equal height. 

In the 13,000 series, with five-year-old trees, trees from buds near 
the basal end stood first in height, followed by trees from buds from 
middle of shoot and then by trees from terminal buds. | 

But in all of the four series no group of trees representing any 
one of the four locations had sufficient advantage in growth over. other 
groups to make it stand out in any distinctive way. The differences 
were so insignificant as to encourage the belief that repetition of the 
work, or any moderate addition to the numbers of trees involved, would 
be quite likely to change or evento reverse entirely the sequence of 
greatest height. In Tables 17 to 20 are shown, by series, the averages 
of total growth by years for trees from buds from each location. In 
Figs. 33 to 36 these data are presented in graphic form. 

Figs. 37 to 43 show individual trees of the 3,000 series testing 
buds from different locations on the shoot. All are from photographs 
made in July, 1915. 


TasLe 17.—LocatTion or Bup on SuHoort: 3,000 Serres, SHowING GROWTH OF 
TREES oF ALL VARIETIES COMBINED 


(Expressed in inches) 


Year | 1908 | 1909 | 1910 | 1911 |.1912 | 1913 | 1914 | 1915 
=f rir: Terminal Buds: Average of 23 Trees teers 
ES ERT Se ET? Be 18 ees 19 Gs 10 ae 40 a 48 60 | 75 | 98 
oh yt Se ee eT 37 49 76 
. Lateral at Distal End: Tienes of 29 Trees 
UN RSMMRU Li sc ols ois se a's oe ee 20 Us 17 ee 10 42 | 52 | 65 | 78 | 102 
och) EEE Eee e vc 40 52 79 
Middle of Shoot: pees of 17 Trees 
ROMINA oi V-neck aoe | 20 | 17 10 dt te 54 | 68 | 83 107 
PRONE 35 S227, te oa ke a oi 47 56 82 
Near Basal End: jaa of 26 Trees 
Height. CRT er & 19 ae 18 10 ee 49 Le 59 | 70 | 82 | 107 
a: ate a Ey 2 45 56 83 


Note.—Total growth is Tecoeaed for 1908 sid 1909, for 1910 length of leader 
only, and for each succeeding year total height of tree. ' 


1918] : BULLETIN No. 211 235 


TABLE 18.—LocaTION oF BuD ON Sacer: 8, 000 Szrres, SHowinG GROWTH OF 
TREES OF ALL VARIETIES CoMBINED 


(Expressed in inches) 


Year | 1910 | 1911 j 1912 | 1918 | 1914 | 1915 
Lateral at Distal End: Average of 10 Trees 
Beene = a. tooo Sees 25 4 36 | 37 53 73 
Speen 6 vig. cds kwon ss are each ne 11 23 50 
Middle of Shoot: Average of 12 Trees 
FRRgHG Signe a veka 18 oe 33 39 51 68 
Spreads. siies Sse es oe Se 11 24 39 
. Near Basal End: Preaae “of 6 Trees 

UR EE Ga ear 16 6 36 45 57 | 76 
Sores ae Be: ar 13 27 AT 


Norr.—Total growth is samuel for 1910, 1911 length of leader only, and 
for each succeeding year total height of tree. 


Taste 19.—Location or Bup on Suoor: 10,000 Serins, SHOWING Caan OF 
TREES oF ALL VaRtetIEs COMBINED 


(Expressed in inches) 


Year ; 1910 | 1911 }| 1912 | 1913 | 1914 | 1915 
Lateral at Distal End: Average of 64 Trees 
PRONG F cissc eetecejareute eee 20 is 39 | . 49 60 | 82 
on: eer ie fa ieee es -16 29 57 
Middle of Shoot: Secties of 74 Trees : 
Height ...... oo Seeaee oe 18 7 37 48 57 73 
Spread). saves leek cerns at 53 Bs 14 28 57 
Near Basal End: Average of 48 Trees : 
eign Sods eens 21 7 37 48 57 78. 
Spread sss ck poate sy 15 28 58 


Notre.—Total conth i is Seine for 1910, for 1911 length of leader only, and 
for each succeeding year total height of tree. 


TaBLEe 20.—LocaTion oF Bup on SuHoort: 13,000 Serres, SHowinG GROWTH OF 
TREES OF ALL VARIETIES COMBINED 


(Expressed in inches) 


Year 1010 1912. | 191. . 1914. |S: 1015 

Terminal Buds: Average of 36 Trees 

Sn eres re | 8 | 22 | 27 | 39 | 57 

BPTOAT bpp) s 6a eee gi an Fi at 12 32 
Middle of Shoot: Average of 24 Trees . 

Height. ica ces, erenk es | 9 20 | 30 38 | 60 

Spreads ia see sees Re re | Sere. 34 
Near Basal End: Average of 15 Trees 

Helens. 455s sccetaces | 10 20 | 30 42 65 

Spreads 2. Ares eis ee vA Re 13 38 


Notr.—Length of toniies earey is recorded for 1911, and for each succeeding 
- year total height of tree. 


236 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


HO 
/ 
/ 
100 ff 
— Terminal // 
_ [=== Lateral at Distal Enel /] 
90 |_— —-- Middle of Shoot | } 
. —— Near Basal End // / / 


8 
Ss 
Sy 


i 
he, 
— 


y; \” 
ee VA 
2. Ve 
| /\f A 
—§@ LW 
2 JA, 
© 50 ya LAL 
w c V 
S 
8 
g 
x 


8 
a 


10 


) 
Years 1908 1999 1910 (9 , 1912 193 1914 19/5 


Fig. 33.— SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM Bups SELECTED FROM DIFFERENT 
LOCATIONS ON THE SHOOT: ALL VARIETIES COMBINED, 3,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1908 and 1909 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and 
branches, in 1910 by the length of leader only, and in 1911 to 1915 by the total 
height. 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 ; 237:: : 


80 
— Lateral at Distal Erd // 
70; ----Middle of Shoot 7 
——Near Basal End fe /] / 
vA"4 7 
n 60 L/é 
$ Wi, 
4 Y, 
= Va 
i 50 A y, 
= Pop 
9 y’ 4, 
« 40 rg 77 
© VAY 
3 7 
di 
S «3 i 
me 20 *. i: 
as # 
1+} Wtf 
4 


O = 
Yeors 1910 «6191 1912 IS 19S. 


Fic. 34.— SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM Bups SELECTED FROM DIFFERENT 
Locations ON THE SHooT: ALL VARIETIES COMBINED, 8,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1910 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and branches, 
in 1911 by the length of leader only, and in 1912 to 1915 by the total height. 


. 238 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


me ef / 
— Lateral at Distal End I 
WH --—-Middle of Shoot 7 
—-—Near Basal End x 
TO y 
/ 
/ 
60 
oy 


50 


Average of Growth — Inches 
8 


Sm, 
<< 


20 S . 
Ns q 
NS i 
SN $ 
<h 4 
. 
mm | f 
10 arid 
‘ Uj 
SH 


pans f | 
Years 1910 = /9) 19/2 I9IZ /9/4. 19/5 


Fig. 35.—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM BupDS SELECTED FROM DIFFERENT 
LOCATIONS ON THE SHOOT: ALL VARIETIES COMBINED, 10,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1910 was measured by the sum of lengths of leader and branches, 
in 1911 by the length of leader only, and in 1912 to 1915 by the total height. 


* 1918] Buturrin No. 211 239 


7O 
—_—— Terminal 
60} ---- Middle of Shoot / 
eas —-— Near Basal End Z 1) 
Ji 
S 50 
Ss. [he 
s Af 
> 40 Ws y 
2 YA 
G LA 
a v 
ee , 
S 407 
S 20 7 é 
S a 
=x £ 
10 


: 
Years 1911 1912 IWS 1914. 1915 


Fic. 36.—SHOWING THE GROWTH OF TREES FROM Bups SELECTED FROM DIFFERENT 
LocaTIONS ON THE SHOOT: ALL VARIETIES COMBINED, 13,000 SERIES 


Growth in 1911 was measured by the length of leader only, and in 1912 to 
1915 by the total height. 


240 . APPLE-BUD SELECTION; SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, - 


ww? “2 
~~: & 
“ey ieee 


‘4 


3 


Fig. 37.—No. 3170: GRIMES FROM TERMINAL Bubp 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 10 FEET 


241 


BULLETIN No. 211 


1918] 


GRIMES FROM Bup FROM DiIsTAL END oF SHOOT 


Fig. 38.—No. 3191 


HEIGHT, OcToBER 13, 1915, 9 FEET, 6 INCHES 


242 APPLE-BUD SELECTION; SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


yex oo. 
~ eta 


aS ae 


Fie. 39.—No. 3177: GRIMES FROM Bup FROM MIDDLE oF SHOOT 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 10 FEET, 3 INCHES 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 243 


Fie. 40.—No. 3185: GRIMES FRom Bup NEAR BASE or SHOOT 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 9 FEET, 6 INCHES 


244 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


Fig. 41.—No. 3083: OLDENBURG FROM TERMINAL Bup 


HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 10 FEET, 9 INCHES 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 245 


| 


Fig. 42.—No, 3106: OLDENBURG FROM BuD NEAR BASE oF SHOOT 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 9 Freer, 8 INCHES 


246 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


A 


Fig. 43.—No. 3079: WINESAP FROM Bup at DistaL END or SHOOT 
HEIGHT, OCTOBER 13, 1915, 11 FEEt 


1918 | BULLETIN No. 211 247 


When the results thus far obtained in this test of buds for pur- 
poses of propagation are platted, a striking uniformity in the growth 
curves is shown. The lines are so nearly coincident and indicate such 
slight departures from absolute uniformity that there remains no basis 
for any assumed differences in value of the buds tested. Results are — 
negative. As large and as well-formed trees were grown from small 
buds as from large. Central terminal buds exhibited no advantages 
over extreme lateral buds, or over buds from interior branches, or even 
over buds from water sprouts, and the same results prevailed 
with reference to location on the shoot. Buds from near the 
base, from central, and from terminal locations gave equally good 
trees. These conclusions are based upon comparisons between the dif- 
ferent lots of trees from buds from the different locations, but they 
should not convey the idea that there was perfect uniformity~in the 
trees. Averages for the lots show uniformity, but within the groups 
‘of trees from buds from the same locations or from buds of uniform 
size, either large or small, there were often striking individual differ- | 
ences. For example, in comparing six trees of Grimes propagated from — 
large buds, and eight years old, with’ six trees of the same age propa- 
gated from.the smallest buds to be found on the tree, the average 
growth of the trees from large buds was found to be almost identical 
‘with the average of those from small buds, but the range of variation 
among the individuals of either group was considerable. Of the six 
trees from large buds the largest exceeded the smallest by 2 feet in 
height, 2 feet in spread, and 1% inch in trunk diameter. Of the six 
trees from small buds, the largest exceeded the smallest by 2 feet 8 
inches in height, 2 feet in spread, and % inch in trunk diameter. These 
individual differences, sometimes greater, sometimes less, were com- 
mon to all groups; they show the necessity of considerable numbers 
in order to make right comparisons between group averages. 

Changes in the relative positions of individuals. within a group 
when contrasted as to growth increments were quite common. Of two 
trees one might exceed the other in growth the first year, fall below it 
in the second, regain its advance position in the third year, again lose 
it, and again regain it, and so on for several years. The annual growth 
of two Winesap trees, Which may be distinguished as A and B, illus- 
trate this variation. Both were grafted on the same day in 1908; the 
buds chosen for the two trees were similarly situated near the bases — 
of shoots; and the stocks upon which the scions were grafted were, to 
all appearances, similar. During the season of 1908, A made 33 per- 
cent more growth than B. In 1909, B exceeded A in total growth by 
38 percent. In 1910, when the leaders only were measured, the length 
produced by B was two and one-half times that produced by A. In 
1911, when measurements of total height were recorded, A exceeded 
B by 38 percent; in the next year, it maintained the lead by about 14 


[ June, 


SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION 


248 


LEI 90T 98 69 cg CT 8 01 og 'T co [e1oyVT| GEOL stg 
66 18 2 69 9¢ 1 Z ST. GL 00°9 [eureay,) = 8Z0T O31] 
00T 82; 99 *o 9F SI 8 L GSS 00° ‘Teoywy] —- Te0T Trewg 
101 08 CL 9¢ SP: rat ve reat 00°¢ &Z'9 jeurwsey|  9ZOT osIB'T 
6IT 96 82 +9 “9¢ ra 6Z 8ST 0¢'T tam | [81938'T| — SSOT Teg 
POT 8 82 Lt oo St. GZ LI GSP 00°9 [euraney) 2201 oB1v'T 
26 89 9 co LP ial 1% 6 00° o¢*T Te10}8T| HOT Teg 
6 69 09 . +P OF 6 02. ial 09°F 00°¢ euray} —€Z01 os1v'T 
88 6¢ 8h 98 re ra 1Z 8 00°S. 00°% [e1038T|  $S0T Treug 
o9 68 $8 if 23 6 55h. | OS cI cS F GZ'9 yeuruney| — 1Z01 os1e'T 
C161 bI6T €16t | S161 I16t_ | OT6T | 6061 | 806T (“uruz) (“uauz) tor 
yeooyT | soquinu SS i) 
Topeoy jo | (soyour) yypveig | YyysueT : ienies ng 
(soyout) 4YySIey [e1OJ, ‘yyguery |. yy Poe 1810], pnq oul, [os P 


saag TIVWG WOud GNV sang MOUuVy WONT SHAN], JO HLMOUD ONIMOHY :DUNnaNAGIO—[Z AAV, 


1918] - it BULLETIN No. 211 249 


percent, but in 1913, B made the greater growth, exceeding A by 21 
percent. In the two remaining years for which there is record, B 
continued to lead, exceeding A in 1914 by 18 percent, and in 1915 by 
21 percent. Whether A will again lead, or remain in second place, is 
impossible to predict, but from many observations of these individual 
differences in growth it appears that, in general, differences become 
less with increase in age, provided the trees remain healthy. When 
two apparently healthy trees fluctuate in growth, as in the example 
cited, it is usually not possible to assign definite causes. Visible parts 
of the trees appear normal, but agencies that may operate to acceler- 
ate or retard root functions are hidden and cannot easily be discov- 
ered. The fluctuations in rate of growth here considered were 
apparent in all groups; hence. their occurrence was entirely inde- 
pendent of the size of the initial buds from which the trees were 
grown or of the situation on tree or shoot from which the original 
buds were. taken. 

Growth of Selected Oldenburg Trees—As a further exhibit of the 
relation between size of the chosen bud and subsequent growth, the 
measurements of ten Oldenburg trees, eight years old, may be given. 
’ Five of the trees were grown from buds selected as large and five from 
buds selected as small. Original bud measurements and growth 
records up to and including 1915 are given in Table 21. For con- 
venience in comparing, the trees are arranged in pairs, a tree from a 
large bud associated with one from a small bud. 

Four of the large buds were terminal, one was a lateral from just 
below an undeveloped terminal; two of the shoots from which buds 
were taken were top terminal, and three were short laterals from near 
the apex of the shoot of the preceding year. The small buds were all 
lateral from shoots from short interior branches.. All the buds were 
selected to represent extremes in size; that they did this seems evident 
from the individual measurements. The large buds were all more than © 
three times and in two-cases nearly five times the length of the small; 
in all cases they were more than twice the breadth of the small buds. 
It may also be noted, altho not shown in the table, that scions carrying 
the large buds were in all cases larger than those carrying the small 
buds. Large buds, therefore, had not only the advantage that is sup- 
posed to belong to great size, but the additional advantage of the ~ 
presumably larger store of reserve plant food to be found in the larger 
scions. 
But larger size of bud and more robust scions appear to have had 
nu influence upon subsequent growth other than is shown by the fact 
that, in the first season, four of the five pairs showed greater growth 
from the large buds. The remaining pair, in which the growth from 
the small bud slightly exceeded that from the large bud, chanced to be 
the one showing the greatest difference between the buds paired; the 
large bud was 4.8 times as long and 2.83 times as broad as the small 


250 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES —— [June, 


bud. In two of the four pairs in which trees from large buds showed 
greater growth in the first year, the trees from small buds in the 
second year exceeded those from large buds, and in the other two pairs 
the advantage gained in the first year was maintained. For the third 
year the trees from small buds exceeded those from large buds in~ 
these four pairs. In the following five years there were fluctuations, 
and for the last year, 1915, the advantage in growth remained with 
trees from small buds in three of the pairs and with those from large 
buds in the other two pairs. The same irregularities i in growth shown 
by Oldenburg appeared in other varieties and in other series of the 
test of size of buds. Nowhere was there any evidence tending to 
support the contention that large buds possess poveninge: ¢ over small 
buds for purposes of propagation. — 


Nias VALUE OF ROBUST AND SLENDER SCIONS 


The possible advantage accruing to buds borne on ‘robust scions, 
because of the presumably greater supply of reserve nutrients than is 
to be found in slender scions, referred to above, may be studied by 
comparing a random selection of scions on the basis of scion diameters 
as shown by diameters of distal internodes. Ten scions were selected 
in which these diameters ranged from 4.5 to 7 mm., with an average of 
5.15 mm., and for which the average length was 6.4 inches, These 
were all from top terminal shoots and. were equally divided between 

Ben Davis and Oldenburg. Ten other scions selected had distal inter- 
node diameters of from 1.75 to 2 mm., with an average of 1.97 mm., 
and an average length of 5.77 inches. OF these scions seven were from 
shoots from short interior branches, two were from extreme lateral 
shoots, and one was from a water sprout. Four were from Grimes, 
three from Winesap, and three from Oldenburg. . 

To facilitate a comparison of records, the averages for each season 
are brought. together in Table 22. 


_TasBLe 22.—CoMPARISON OF Gnowie OF TREES FROM ROBUST AND FROM SLENDER 
Scions 


(Average in inches) 


Diam. of | Total h ‘ 
No. : Length | *0ta fe: Total height 
of ag of growth leader i igs 


node | S02 |7998]1909} 1910 |1911]1912|1913|1914) 1915 


scions 


Robust, 
sa 4 10 0.206 | 6.40 |17.5/20.3) 12.2 |41.2/49.4/63.4/78.8)101.9 
ender 
scions..| 10 | 0.079 | 5.77 |16.7/15.4f10.7 |39.8/50.7/64.1/81.8/110.9 


This record shows that the initial growth frorh buds on robust 
scions was slightly greater than that from buds on slender scions and 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 251 


that the relative positions of the two groups remained the same to the 
end of the fourth season. In the fifth season the positions were re- 
versed. The trees from buds on slender scions exceeded the others in 
height and continued this advantage thru 1915; or to the end of the 
record. However, neither in the first years, in which trees from robust 
scions had the advantage, nor in the last years, in which trees from 
slender scions made the greater growth, were differences such as to 
indicate marked superiority of one group over the other in growth. 

While the differences in growth averages for the groups were 
insignificant, the fluctuations in growth of individuals within each 
group were decided, often extreme, and worthy of note. Arranging the 
trees from scions of large diameter according to the magnitude of 
growth in 1908, with No. 1 representing maximum growth and No. 10 
the minimum, the top terminal scion of Ben Davis numbered 2009 
occupied the position of No. 1. In 1909 it dropped to tenth place, 
having the minimum growth. In 1910 it rose to fifth place and in 
1911 regained the position as No. 1, and this it held thru 1915. Another 
top terminal scion of Ben Davis, No. 2005, occupied second place in 
the list of 1908. In 1909 it dropped to fifth place and in 1910 to the 
bottom of the list. In 1911 it ascended to fifth place, then dropped to 
seventh, and still farther to ninth place in 1913; it rose to eighth 
place in 1914, then dropped to ninth in 1915. Third place in 1908 was 
occupied by No. 2004, another top terminal scion of Ben Davis; this 
fell to ninth place in 1909, rose to second place in 1910, then occupied 
fourth place for two seasons, had sixth place in 1913, dropped to tenth 
place in 1914, and remained in this position in 1915. The eighth place 
in 1908 was filled by the top terminal scion of Oldenburg numbered 
2104. This rose to first place in 1909 and held it thru 1910. In 1911 
it dropped to sixth place, occupied the eighth place in 1912 and 1918, 
rose to seventh in 1914, and remained in that position in 1915. An- 
other similar scion, No. 2110, was in ninth place in 1908, second in 
1909, third in 1910, eighth in 1911, tenth in 1912 and 1913, ninth in 
1914, and eighth in 1915. At the bottom of the list in 1908 was No. 
2103, also a top terminal Oldenburg scion. This rose to eighth place 
in 1909, and to first in 1910; then it dropped to sixth, remaining there 
two seasons, after which it rose thru fourth place in 1913 to second 
place in 1914 and 1915. Remaining numbers of the group fluctuated 
in like manner. Not one maintained an even course or exhibited any 
approach to uniformity in the increments of successive seasons. In 
the companion group of trees grown from attenuated scions, fluctua- 
tions in growth were shown by each individual just as extreme and 
irregular as those given as illustrations from the group of trees from 
scions of large diameter. 

Summarizing the direction of movement of growth magnitudes 
after the first year (1908), it appears that for the ten trees from large 


252 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


secions, three made less growth in 1909, four increased in growth for 
that year, while the remaining three made the same growth in 1909 as 
in 1908 and then began fluctuating, one moving to less and two to 
greater growth. For the trees from attenuated scions six made less 
growth in 1909 than in 1908, three increased in growth for that year, 
while one made growth in 1909 equal to that of 1908 and after that 
fluctuated up and down within comparatively narrow limits, going 
from fourth place in the first two years to second place in the third 
year, fourth in the fourth year, third in the fifth year, fourth in the 
sixth year, and fifth in the last two years. 

Now, the only fact that may be regarded as indicating superiority 
on the part of scions of large diameter, is that trees from such scions 
showed slightly greater averages of growth in the first years than did 
trees from the slender scions. Differences in the averages, however, 
were very small, and when it is considered that some individuals from 
slender scions in the first year showed equal growth with others from 
stout scions and in some cases even exceeded them, that in all seasons 
following the first, all trees fluctuated in amount of growth in a re- 
markable manner, and further, that in the last four years the differ- 
ences in average growth transferred the apparent advantage to trees 
from slender scions, it appears that there is no tangible basis upon 
which to establish the idea that scions of large diameter, by virtue of 
size and presumably larger store of available nutrients, are superior to 
scions of small diameter for purposes of propagation. Each tree ap- 
peared to pursue its own course independently of others of its class; 
each added a yearly increment the magnitude of which was greater 
or less according as its surroundings were favorable or unfavorable 
te growth. 


Errect or Vicor or Stock oN GrowTH 


Aside from any influence upon growth that may be inherent in a 
particular bud or scion, there is the influence of the stock upon which 
the scion is grafted. All scions used in this test of buds were grafted, 
by the veneer method, upon crown pieces of ordinary apple seedlings 
as stocks. Any lot of seedlings exhibits wide variations in vigor and 
habit of growth; so these stocks, altho graded to eliminate weak indi- 
viduals, still showed wide differences. Some were supplied with abun- 
dant roots and correspondingly large stems; others had few roots and 
slender stems. - Vigor of stocks as measured in root production and 
stem growth’ existed in all degrees and each individual stock reflected 
its habit in some degree on the scion grafted upon it. - 


INFLUENCE OF CARE IN GRAFTING 


Degree of perfection in the mechanical operations of grafting may 
also exercise an important influence upon growth of the scion. Among 


1918] © BULLETIN No. 211 253 


several hundred veneer grafts, even when made with extreme care, 
differences may be found in degree of perfection of contact between 
stock and scion. Slight convexities or concavities in the surfaces 
brought together prevent the complete and continuous contact of cam- 
bium essential to that prompt and efficient union which has an un- 
doubted influence in advancing development from scion buds. Care 
of grafts during the period between making and planting in nursery, 
particularly with reference to temperature and uniformity in the sup- 
ply of moisture, has an influence on subsequent growth and so also 
have care in planting, character of soil, and all those atmospheric con- 
ditions which singly or collectively operate to advance or retard 
plant growth. 


VARIETAL AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES 


Studies of the differences in annual increments and general be- 

havior in growth of the trees grown from selected buds support and 
emphasize the fact of distinct individuality. In general habit the trees 
follow the parent varieties: Yellow Transparent, Whitney, and Olden- 
burg are upright, Grimes and Rome tend to rounded, symmetrical 
forms, while Ben Davis, Winesap, and Jonathan exhibit the usual 
irregularity in branch growth, tending to spreading and to more or 
less unsymmetrical shapes. But within any varietal group no two trees 
are alike. Often casual examination of a group gives the impression 
of great similarity, but close observation and measurements imvariably 
bring out differences and show that the trees have reached their present 
state of development by very unequal increments. 

Some extreme cases occurred in which individuals showed differ- 
ences so conspicuous as to be readily noticed even by casual observers, 
as for example, two Ben Davis trees of exactly the same age, both from 
selected large buds from the same tree, the trees grown side by side in 
nursery and for the five years ending with 1915 fifteen feet apart in 
orchard. Both appeared healthy, but one was 54 percent taller than 
the other, had 87.5 percent more spread, and 100 percent greater trunk 
diameter. There were several other cases of equally great individual 
differences, but in general differences between individuals, altho appre- 
ciable, were much less. In most cases it is no more possible to assign 
specific causes for extreme individual differences than it is to assign 
them for the minor differences. In the example just given, the trees 
thruout life had been grown in such close proximity and so nearly 
under the same conditions that moisture, temperature, and other 
atmospheric conditions could not be considered as causes of the differ- 
ences; for the same reason it appears improbable that soil conditions 
were in any way responsible for the wide differences observed in the 
other trees. Causes for the differences in growth, then, must lie with 
the individual plants, either in inherent qualities that belong to the 


254 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


stocks or to the scions, or to both, or to differences in the mechanical 
operation of grafting, The influence of these things is indeterminable 
and the causes of the differences remain unknown. 


DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 


In these tests many comparisons have been made between indi- 
viduals of different groups and between entire groups, but no aeccept- 
able evidence has been found that growth of trees is in any way 
dependent upon size of scion, size of individual bud, location of bud 
upon the tree, or location of bud upon the shoot. No other conclusion 
is possible from the records than this: that all buds from healthy shoots 
are of equal value for purposes of propagation, at least so far as growth 
of trees is concerned. 


GROWING SEEDLINGS FROM SEEDS OF FRUITS FROM 
TREES CHOSEN AS POSSESSING SPECIAL MERIT 


This project was begun in 1908 and was considerably extended in 
1909. The initial planting in the spring of 1909 was, in large part, 
a failure from various causes, so that few trees of that group survived 
and details of the group need not be given here further than to record 
something of the history of the remaining trees. Better success attend- 
ed the planting made in the spring of 1910, of the seeds secured in the 
fall in 1909; this lot in 1915 was represented by more than three thou- 
sand living trees. Results under this project are not to be attained 
until the seedlings are established in fruit production; the little that 
need be recorded at this time concerns growth only. 


SEEDLINGS FROM F'ruITS or 1908 


In September, 1908, the Station received Grimes apples from the 
orchard of Perrine Brothers at Centralia. The fruits, 545 in number, 
all came from one tree that had an established reputation for produc- 
tiveness. They were separated into two grades on the basis of size. All 
fruits having transverse diameters ‘of 65 mm, or more were included 
in the group designated as ‘‘large’’; those having transverse diameters 
of 64 mm. or less fell into the group designated as ‘‘small.’’ Average 
weights and measurements of the two groups were as follows: 


Large Small 


miurnhier Of aples. S54 Sid diesst samiesie Sones \ eaeR > BEAT oe 293 .00 252.00 
Average weight of apples (grams)..............0..0-00 eee 130.70 106.31 
Average longitudinal diameter (mm.).........0.......0005 57.00 57.25 
Average transverse diameter (mm.) .,.............4.- Perey 62.00 
Total apparently good seeds..... ae w iatattarat ot eb Gg: RE RAS tia ork ae 2079.00 1417.00 


Average seeds to the fruit.............--....+5 Sah scayie Maps ‘ 7.09 5.62 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 = > 255 


Among the large apples one had six cells; all others had the nor- 
mal number of five. The seeds were stratified in sand in boxes and 
buried in earth for the winter. In the spring of 1909 there was 
unavoidable delay in preparation of ground for reception of the seeds, 
and when they were taken up and separated from the sand, germina- 
tion had already begun. Some, presumably the seeds possessing great- 
est vitality, had progressed so far in germination that they did not 
survive shifting to nursery; thus a serious loss was incurred at the 
beginning. Of the seedlings that started growth, many were weak and 
a large proportion of these did not survive the first season. - 

The young trees were grown in nursery until they were four years 
old because no land was available upon which to plant at orchard dis- 
tances. The number living at planting time in 1911 was 123; when 
finally planted 15 by 15 feet in orchard, on May 3, 1913, there remained 
112 trees. Fourteen trees died later, so that at the end of 1915 there 
were living 98 trees seven years old. 

All the trees were slow in starting growth after being planted in 
orchard and made but feeble growth that season. There was some 
improvement the next year and still further improvement in 1915, but 
the trees still had a stunted appearance which seemed likely to linger 
for some time if not permanently. The average height was a little 
less than six feet with an average spread of four and one-half feet. 
The last rating as to grade divided the trees as follows: good, 20 per- 
cent; fair, 58 percent; poor, 22 percent. 

At about the same time that the Grimes apples were received, 452 
Jonathan apples, taken from one of the most productive trees in the 
orchard of Mr. J. C. B. Heaton of New Burnside, Johnson county, 
were also received. These apples were graded into two size-groups on 
the same basis used in the division of the Grimes apples. The average 
weights and measurements were as below: ; 


. Large Small 
NGMDGE OF BONIOR coi ois peek woe ee ce chene 374.00 78.00 
Average weight of apples (grams)................. 141.46 93.83 
Average longitudinal diameter (mm.)............. 60.31 52.26 
Average transverse diameter (mm.)........... ae ie AOs91 60.59 
Total apparently good seeds.................04-5 2 157.00 423 .00 
Average seeds to the fruit.................2.005- 5.77 5.42 


The Jonathan seeds were treated in exactly the same manner as 
the Grimes, and the seedlings of the two varieties were grown in con- 
tiguous rows each year. The Jonathan losses occurring were about 
equal to those sustained by Grimes; the number of trees remaining 
was small. In 1910 there were 78; in 1911 this number had fallen to 
61, and this was the number planted in orchard 15 by 15 feet on May 
3, 1918. Nine weak trees died later, leaving but 52 to represent this 
variety group. These trees had the same stunted appearance charac- 


256 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


terizing the Grimes seedlings; they had an average height of five and 
one-half feet and an average spread of five feet. Rated as to quality, 
at the same time the Grimes were rated, they classified as goed, 27 per- 
cent; fair, 56 percent; poor, 17 percent. 

The division of the apples of these two varieties into size-groups, 
at the time the seeds were collected, was madé with the intention of 
testing the relative vigor of seedlings from seeds of large fruits as com- 
pared with those from seeds of small fruits. At the same time record 
was made of the number and distribution in cells of the seeds of each . 
apple in an effort to determine whether or not there is a definite rela- 
tion between seed production and size of fruit.- The seedlings of these 
1908 groups, however, were so few in number that the division betweer 
those from large fruits and those from small was abandoned, and 
further records, to be maintained until the seedlings are established 
in fruit production, consider them only as variety groups. The seed- 
production record was combined with other like records since obtained, 
and the whole is treated in a separate publication (Bulletin 203). 


SEEDLINGS FROM, Fruits or 1909 


Seedlings from seeds collected in 1909, numbered, in 1915, above 
three thousand and represented six varieties. Such results as the 
project may yield when the fruiting characteristics have been deter- 
- mined will be derived mainly from these groups, and it therefore seems 
best to record the history of the trees in some detail. 

All apples used in 1909 were supplied by Mr. J. C. B. Heaton 
from his orchards at New Burnside in Johnson county. They were 
barreled and shipped to the Station late in October. When received 
they were at once placed in storage, where they remained until the 
work of'weighing and measuring them and extracting the seeds could 
be undertaken. Six varieties were represented, each by apples from 
a single tree that had been selected because of exceptional fruiting 
qualities. 

Removal of seeds was begun November 9 and continued intermit- 
tently until finished November 29. The fruits of each variety were 
separated into two size-groups. The division point between large and 
small apples was fixed at 65 mm. as the minimum transverse diameter 
for large apples of Arkansas Black, Ben Davis, and Minkler, and at 
58 mm. as the minimum transverse diameter for large apples of 
Rhenish May, Winesap, and Smith Cider. The groups of large fruits 
_ thus very closely correspond with the No. 1 grade for the classes to 
which the varieties belong. Each fruit was weighed, calipered for 
longitudinal and transverse diameters, then cut transversely for de- 
termination of the number and distribution of the seeds. As each 
lot was completed the seeds were sorted for the removal of those which 
had been accidentally injured by the knife in opening the fruit, or 


1918] Butierin No. 211 _ 257 


which had been partially eaten by codling-moth larve, or otherwise 
subjected to apparent injury. This process reduced the total of seeds 
_ by about 11 percent and left only those that, so far as could be judged 
by appearance, were capable of germination. Each lot of seeds was 
then stratified in sand in bulb pans and buried in earth. ; 
Comparison of size-groups is not very satisfactory because of the 
wide differences in numbers of apples. In the aggregate of all varieties 
the large fruits were 2.8 times as many as the small and contained 
3.22 times as many seeds. With each variety the averages of seeds to 
the fruit were larger for large fruits than for small. Bringing the 
groups of large apples together, Rhenish May led in number of seeds 
to the fruit with an average of 11.76; Minkler was the least productive, 
as shown by the average of 4.22 seeds. Assembling the groups of small 
apples, Winesap had the highest average, 8.91 seeds to each fruit, and 
here also Minkler had the lowest, 2.91 seeds to each fruit. Discarding 
size-groups and considering the aggregate of fruits for each variety, 
Rhenish May showed greatest productiveness with an average of 10.83 
seeds for each fruit. The other varieties ranked in descending order 
as follows: Winesap, Smith Cider, Arkansas Black, Ben Davis, and 
Minkler. ees ; 
To avoid repetition of the experience of the preceding year, when 
a considerable portion of the buried seeds germinated before it was 
possible to plant them, all the seed pans were taken up in February 
and placed in cold, storage at a temperature of 31°F. On March 28, 
1910, the seeds were separated from the sand and planted in nursery 
rows; they were then in excellent condition. It was the intention to 
determine the percentage of germination in each lot of seeds, but the 
demands of other projects were such that it was found impossible to 
do this, hence it is only known that germination was abundant. 
During the first season the seedlings made that same slow, weak 
growth that appears to be characteristic of all apple seedlings grown 
on the black soil of this locality. About midsummer, at the time of 
hand-weeding the nursery, many weak seedlings were taken out to 
make more room for the better ones. In the fall of 1910 all were taken 
up for winter storage and again planted in nursery in the spring of 
1911. This was repeated in the fall of 1911 and again in 1912. The 
ageregate of seedlings taken up for storage in the fall of 1911 was 
5,648. In the fall of 1912 they numbered 5,315. In May, 1913, the 
seedlings, being then three years old, were permanently planted in 
orchard, 15 by 15 feet. The number thus planted was 4,988 ; of these, 
4,568 were planted on the Station farm at the University and 420, 35 
of each size-group of each variety, were sent to the Station farm at 
Olney in Richland county. 
The losses indicated by the differences in the aggregates here given 
were mainly due to the death of seedlings that from the beginning had 
exhibited very low vitality. Many of these weak seedlings existed thru 


[ June,” 


258 


SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES 


Te9 Sg €24T 2 F08 Z9 GLT L BENGE AY EF 
168 IST 8 voy G09 8 6F €¢ 96 &P L6°SZ G96 [Bus 
&P 6 VES 6 TOO T SEs OL LE ‘19 66° 0S T€°901 $380 T eBIBT ores desu, 
98°2 €L0 @ SSE 86E & G0 Sg 89° FP 99° FL G0€ Teas 
00°8 GEG G GOV ¥Z9 @ OF 99 €8°€¢ 89° Ser 8ZE OBIVT |e TOPIC) YRUIg 
Lg'9 631 & GgE 180 ST°¢s AU a4 GP SL 697 TIS 
92° TT 9F8 ZS “LEGS £0F SG €L° 39 €9°0¢ vL SOT 6ST 3 esiey [o's sss ABP YstueMY 
16°% 69 T OL £0'T9 SE LP Te 90T ¥G Teas 
oo PY mgt | 686T €9L € 48°82 Sg" lg 69 FLT 8h OBIWT [rss TaPPUTAL 
62°¢ eoP £9 9T¢ ST 09 16° 6¥ €1' 26 68 [Bus 
€o'9 18d v7 To9 og8 ¥ 88° SL LvV'09 Og PST Srl OBIVT |" stAeq Ueg 
€8'°¢ S8T 61 FOS €9 09 98 6P ¥6 86 cé Teas 
E'L vrs I 60T €g9 T STIL &%' 09 vo SOT GZS esIvy |°**** "Rl sesueyIV 
qmaj tod | poytyes3s | popavostp | poonpoid OSIOA [vu (surei3) sojdde dnoxd 
Spoes Jo Spoes spoes spees -suvly, |-Ipnyisuoy | 4ysIeM jo ~onig AYOUB A 
ON e4y | THIOL JO “ON JO°ON |(‘ururl) ‘werp osv10Ay esvioAy | JoquinN ; 


APPLE-BUD SELECTION 


6061 40 SLINUyT WOU saaag FO NOILVUAWANY GNV SLIOUT JO SLNENATUASVAI— eZ 


aTav I, 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 259 


the second year in nursery and some thru the third year without mak- 
ing any appreciable growth. It is not to be understood that all weak 
seedlings had been eliminated at the time of planting in orchard. Some 
that were set out were but little more promising than many that had 
died, but were given their chance to overcome the weakness, if possi- 
ble. Most of these weak trees did not improve; many died the first 
year in orchard, and others have since succumbed. 

A few words are here necessary in explanation of the loss of a 
large number of trees during the first two seasons in orchard. The 
planting in the spring of 1913 was divided between two areas. In 
one forty-acre tract which was largely occupied by trees grown 
under other projects but which still had some unused space, there 
were planted 1,205 seedlings of three varieties as follows: Arkansas 
Black from seeds from large fruits, 108, from small fruits, 50; Ben 
Davis from large fruits, 392, from small fruits, 7; Smith Cider from 
large fruits, 328, from small fruits, 320. The trees were planted May 
7to 9. The soil here was well cultivated and in excellent condition 
for planting. 

At the opening of spring in 1914, 159 trees, or 13 percent, had 
died. It was the small, weak trees that died, largely from inherent 
lack of vitality, but in part because of the extremely dry conditions 
that prevailed thruout the season. The second enumeration, made in 
the fall of 1915, two seasons after the first enumeration, showed an 
additional loss of only twenty-five trees, or a little more than 2 
percent of the original planting. This small loss indicated that the 
weak trees had been eliminated. There remained at this time 1,021 
trees: 352 classed as good, 429 as fair, and 240 as poor. These trees 
appeared to be established and most of them should reach maturity, 
produce fruit, and fulfil the purpose for which they were grown. 
They are by no means an even lot, but exhibit great diversity in 
growth habit and in vigor. 

Seedlings of the remaining earieden Rhenish May, Minkler, sie 
Winesap, together with a few trees of Arkansas Black remaining 
after filling the area referred to above were planted May 15 to 22 on 
another forty-acre tract that at this time became available. This tract 
had been used for farm crops and had been neglected. It was not in 
satisfactory condition for the reception of trees, but the season was 
so far advanced that further delay was out of the question; the trees 
were planted as quickly as possible and much labor was expended 
in an effort to improve the unfortunate surroundings. No rain fell 
following planting and extreme drouth prevailed thruout the season. 
Three times at short intervals during July and August water was 
hauled in tanks and applied to the trees, but little benefit was derived 
from this treatment. 

No enumeration of the trees was made until the spring of 1914, 
when the aggregate loss was ascertained to be 1,339 trees, or 40 per- 


260 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


cent of the number planted. The largest losses fell on Rhenish May, 
in which variety they amounted to 55 percent, while with Winesap 
the loss was only 21 percent. Of the 3,363 trees planted in the spring 
of 1913, there remained 2,024 in the spring of 1914. Some of these 
were shifted in the process of filling gaps and consolidating rows. 
From the time of enumeration in 1914 to the end of 1915 there was 
an additional loss of 175 trees, making the total loss 1,514 trees, or 
45 percent of the number planted. Most trees made satisfactory 
growth in 1915, and, when the difficulties thru which they had lived 
are considered, the unfavorable conditions at time of planting and 
two summers of extreme drouth, it would seem that they had proved 
‘their resistant qualities and were safely on the way to full develop- 
ment and fruit. production. 

All the trees in this planting had a more or less stunted appear- 
ance; all were below normal size for trees six years of age. The 
growth made in 1915, however, gave promise that the stunted appear- 
ance would soon be overcome and that control of direction and 
amount of branch extension by pruning would, within a few years, 
-bring the trees into satisfactory forms, . 

As the project stood at the close of the year 1915, six years from 
the planting of the seeds, there were in the two plantations on the 
University farm, 2,868 trees. Add to these the 365 trees which were 
living at the time of the last enumeration of the 420 planted at Olney, 
and the total number of surviving trees becomes 3,233, distributed 
as follows: . 


From seed From seed 
NuMBER OF TREES IN 1915 of large _ of small 


; fruit fruit 
Arkansas Black University Farm ............. A eT ee 85 41 
OlneyFarm is 2.5.32. ee oe: 30 30 
Ben Davis University Rigel. os ee ee «- 365 0 
GHIGY. PADI Sos o ok 2 9 iw eater = wate 34 24 
_ Minkler University Fatt i563 600d ewan Sere VES 39 0 
Olney Maren ae oon on dp as oo ort vas 34 19 
Rhenish May University Farm............... ne teu awe . 587 104 
Olney Pari. S505 ia ad hk aah Cae Veg eee 32 30 
Smith Cider Uniivermty Barina. sc Gi on Fe Sao inane 279: 38257 
Olney Farias f005 ssivddanocexs tad cvusy any 33 30 
Winesap | Uxiversity Farm cs ak ek Bee as 630 481 
Olney Parmin5.his2 ss SIS ies dae 35 B84 


If the total number of living trees be compared with the total 
number of seeds planted, it appears that there was one tree for 17.2 
seeds planted, or, expressed in percentage, 5.81 percent of the seeds 
planted persisted as living trees at the end of six years. The propor- 


1918] Buuuetin No. 211 261 


tion of seeds surviving as trees was small and did not fairly represent 
the possibilities in apple-seedling production. No germination record | 
was made, nor was any record kept of the seedlings destroyed in thin- 

ning during the first summer. The seedlings were first enumerated 

when two years old; at that time the number represented a little more 

than 10 percent of the seeds planted. The bosses in the succeeding 

four years amounted to 43 percent, chiefly thru unfortunate condi- 

tions that were beyond control. 

From the standpoint of future work on the project it is perhaps 
fortunate that the number of seedlings is no larger.. To maintain 
-accurate annual growth records, and particularly to diagram ‘and 
describe the fruits of individuals as they are produced, is not a seri- 
ous task when no more than one hundred trees are involved, but 
multiply these by thirty-two and the work is destined to tax the 
resources of the Department, especially in view of the fact that some 
thousands of trees grown under other projects promise demands 
_ for attention at the same time. 

The six varieties here included showed considerable differences 
in numbers of seedlings living at the time of the first enumeration, 
when they were two years old, as contrasted with the numbers of 
seeds planted, and also in relative resistance as shown by a similar’ 
comparison of numbers of trees living in 1915. The groups of seed- 
lings from seeds from large fruits will illustrate this. dn 1911 the 
ratio of seedlings to seeds planted was 1 to 6 for Arkansas Black 
- and Smith Cider, 1 to 10 for Ben Davis, 1 to 11 for Winesap, 1 to 
12 for Rhenish May, and 1 to 25 for Minkler, while the ratio in 1915 
was 1 to 8 for Smith Cider, 1 to 12 for Ben Davis, 1 to 15 for Wine- 
sap, 1 to 18 for Arkansas Black, 1 to 39 for Rhenish May, and 1 to 48 
for Minkler; or, to indicate the losses during the four years by per- 
centages, Ben Davis had the least, 17 percent, followed in order by .- 
Smith Cider with 23 percent, Winesap with 24 percent, Minkler with 
48 percent, Arkansas Black with 68 percent, and Rhenish May with 
69 percent. 

Except for the two varieties Smith Cider and Winesap, compari- 
sons between size-groups are unsatisfactory because of disparity of 
numbers. Two of the small size-groups are entirely eliminated, 
namely, Ben Davis and Minkler. The small size-group of Ben Davis 
was represented by only eighty-nine fruits, from which 455 seeds 
were planted. Only fifty-four seedlings were living at two years of 
age; only seven were planted in orchard, and these died that same 
year. The small size-group of Minkler had only twenty-four apples, 
which yielded 69 seeds; only fifteen weak seedlings survived to be 
planted in orchard in 1913 and these soon died. The small size-group 
of Arkansas Black had but thirty-five apples, from which 185 seeds 
were planted; most of the seeds germinated and seventy-seven trees 


262 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM SELECTED TREES [ June, 


lived to be planted in orchard in 1913. More seedlings in proportion 
to the number of seeds planted were produced by the seeds from 
small apples than by those from large apples. The ratio for the small 
size-group was 1 to 2.4, and for the large size-group, 1 to 14.29. 
Three years later the ratios between living trees and seeds planted 
were 1 to 4.51 for the small size- -group and 1 to 18.16 for the large 
size-group. These ratios indicate a higher productiveness on the 
part of seeds from small fruits than is shown by seeds from large 
fruits. If, however, the percentage of trees lost in the three-year 
period between planting and the end of 1915 be examined, it is found 
that for the seedlings from seeds from small fruits the loss was more 
than twice as great as for those from seeds from large fruits. This indi- 
cates less resistance to adverse conditions and presumably a less 
degree of vitality in the seedlings from small fruits than is possessed 
by the seedlings from large fruits. 

In Rhenish May the disparity in numbers between the size- 
groups was not so great as in Arkansas Black, Ben Davis, and Mink- 
ler, but the numbers of fruits, and hence of seeds, were much larger. 
Here the ratios between seedlings living in 1911 and seeds planted ° 

-were 1 to 12.17 for seedlings from large fruits and 1 to 6.77 for those 
from small fruits. Four years later, in 1915, these ratios became 1 to 
39 for seedlings from large fruits and 1 to 26.25 for those from small 
fruits, showing that the small fruits gave a larger number of seed- 
lings in proportion to the number of seeds planted than did the large | 
fruits, but, as with Arkansas Black, the percentage of loss between 
the first enumeration of seedlings and ‘the end of the season of 1915, 
in this case four years, was greater for the seedlings from small 
fruits. With this variety the percentages of loss were much greater 
than with Arkansas Black, but the difference between loss percent- 

‘ ages of the two size-groups was much less, 68.71 percent for seed- 

lings from large fruits and 74.2 percent for those from small fruits. 

The difference is too small to indicate any clear superiority, in mat- 
ters of resistance and vitality, of seedlings from fruits of large size 
over those from small fruits. 

With Smith Cider and Winesap, parity of numbers of fruits and 
of seeds planted renders comparison of size-groups more satisfactory. 
These varieties, at the time of first enumeration in 1911, gave ratios 
between number of seedlings and number of seeds planted as fol- 
lows: for Smith Cider 1 to 6 for seedlings from large fruits, 1 to 5 
for seedlings from small fruits; for Winesap 1 to 11 for seedlings 
from large fruits and 1 to 10 for seedlings from small fruits. At the 
time of the last enumeration, four years later, the ratios were for 
Smith Cider 1 to 8 for each of the two groups; for Winesap 1 to 15 
for progeny of large fruits, and 1 to 17 for progeny of small fruits. 
The ratios for Smith Cider showed, for 1911, a slight advantage in 


1918] BULLETIN No. 211 _ Eh See 


productiveness on the part of the small size-group, and equality for 
the two size-groups at the last count. For Winesap the advantage in 
productiveness was with the group from small fruits at the time of 
the first enumeration, but was transferred to the group from large 
fruits and was somewhat increased at the last enumeration. When 
percentages of loss for the four-year period between the enumera- 
tions considered are examined, the advantage is found to lie with the 
seedlings from large fruits in both varieties. These percentages are, 
for seedlings from large fruits, 23 for Smith Cider and 24 for Wine- 
sap; for seedlings from small fruits, 37 for Smith Cider and 43 for 
Winesap. 

‘Bringing together the Pa bearing upon comparison of size- 
groups, it appears that relative productiveness as exhibited in ratios 
between numbers of trees living in 1915 and numbers of seeds plant- 
ed was slightly better for seedlings from large fruits in the varieties 
having nearly equal numbers of fruits and seeds, and markedly to 
the advantage of seedlings from small fruits in the varieties in which 
the small size-groups were represented by too small numbers for 
satisfactory comparison. 

Death of trees during the four-year period from the first enu- 
meration, in the fall of 1911, to the close of the season of 1915, offers 
a better basis for comparison of the relative resistance to adverse 
conditions and the possession of sustaining vitality. In each of the 
four varieties having both size-groups represented, the losses were 
greater among seedlings from small fruits than among those from 
large fruits. In the two varieties Arkansas Black and Rhenish May, 
in which there was disparity of numbers in the groups, the differ- 
ences between the loss percentages of the groups were smafl, but in 
Smith Cider and Winesap, where the numbers approximated equal- 
ity, the differences were decided. 

Combining the records here considered with many observations 
on the relative vitality of seedlings of the two size-groups, as indi- 
cated by the character and amount of growth, gives warrant for the 
conclusion that, in a general way, seedlings from seeds of large fruits 
are somewhat more resistant to adverse conditions and possess a 
higher degree of vitality than do seedlings from seeds of small fruits. 
Differences, however, were not perfectly constant and were often 
quite small, indicating that further definite records are needed before 
the question can be regarded as finally answered. 


CONCLUSIONS 


1. Summarized data giving comparisons between trees propa- 
gated from large buds and those propagated from small buds, to- 
gether with the aggregate of impressions derived from careful inspec- 
tions of trees of all groups, admit but one conclusion, namely, that 


264 APPLE-BUD SELECTION: SEEDLINGS FROM ‘SELECTED TREES 


there are no differences, for purposes of propagation, between buds 
of large size and those of small size. 

2. Growth curves of trees propagated from buds from different 
situations on the trees so closely approximate as to leave no basis for 
assuming that it makes any difference from what situation on the 
tree the buds are taken. 


3. All buds from healthy shoots are of equal value for pur- 
poses of propagation, at least so far as growth of trees is concerned. 

4. Fluctuations in growth of individuals within particular 
’ groups are decided, often extreme. In general, differences become 
less with increase in age, provided the trees remain healthy. 

5. There is no tangible basis upon which to establish the as- 
sumption that robust scions are superior to scions of small diameter 
for purposes of propagation. 

6. Studies.of annual increments support and euiphanige the fact 
of distinct individuality in growth of trees. 

7. In general, seedlings from seeds of large fruits are somewhat 
more resistant to adverse conditions and possess a higher degree of 
vitality than do seedlings from seeds of small fruits. 


AX NS OAR Bee fay” GCI ! NT 9 Cras & ob aw 
CO SPP) BN 3 Wire Ys Gels G8 eee > es ae 
ad) Sl Le Dee ee a a EN OBS 
MS Poti Poni faen eae ad eee te Gee 


eS zee’ . .% ALY SA 
AN ie a 1 GE. 
j “ Se 


A ge seats te Nagin gue a Sa A a Wane Be Ee. <b o 
¥ iP el eh RL BSR 2 ee Se oh eo 
Sh rea a ae SS 
Sie sar a Nie Sid {ESS 
‘2 D1 g J :y 

bie an 


Rey "4 


C 
yi 
‘I 


4 
ore 
cS 
o-, 
NZ 
ava 
i F) 
aS 


96 9a u YAY 3} 
eas SORT Ek AEDT be ae 
= ate 02GB EO cS) cae 2 dy OSES 
Eai Riana: ay b GU ees spaeOe = can tt 

PO J SET: Y > (em pane tee 

So! oo San! ge Io Res iby tad 

4) i 
STD eee (Ae 


7. hor ay, nS LS = 
ras: Si as ee SF 
aS es sFigi atin’ anny 


» te, a 
TPES) & Y & 
RRP RAs PN 
eek Ook ND #. gta: a SB? AB oe MRF e5' 
PEIN YS EAS FI RE se pe Be nes 
7 ras phe Oot Gon Nola bias Creare gues VokG 
oe en. ', eS ie ge us Oy) ees hy het 
PRLS ter aOR Oh $end a, Saecom an Go at eae 
pes SSeS ay, FESR oN 
ot “ah eg Se“... 8 y 
BS PROTA 
ores ee, Osis eV gta OF I 
mor 4 TI TEX ee 
a { A i x4 Bpps pea feels 
se A eee {a 1575 Gia erage ane eS 
*. DOS Re See eaten: SECM Oe. Ne? 
oa S DOS eta eee (ea teren, - 
po, <6 awa *n by Bee eS OP & 
en RRC SSN ap oa 
EN Z2 m2 Ke » 38 x eae & , ee a .< 
ole V9 ghee Spe. ao, iy Mase YH VBS ay, 
a4 Ea, ® LLY? > dae 2 yy 2 2) PEO) hs ' 
se aa ts Sig ere aia tarsal owe 
has eA ST) beg © a! gene 
a oe A Ay, hay 0! 3s, Ps Biwes Be ~. Noy SQ We 
be ates Ae oi wa We ite ne, Lh Se 
te =. 9a) b e3 BOSAL to AA ; 
CR Gi peel ee Cea aoe 
eee ie, DS 2B, woos oe ‘X) SEM POO AN JOR 
A | SA = ge e2) 65 a2. Gre? 2 57 abe -* i 8) Bt Saige 
é Ps 8 Sc OGD ¢ fase Ta, © E'S BN to ae Bee OE 
: ar cme sPonrd OSs LPS FOO A I: 
we ap ‘sh i>, = eX . SaaS Pp S52 
ee ED a I RS PHD 
WHR OX. Sara GPE, (8 Dae RE NOAA EPS IR RS 
ate i pares aagern dS Ae PI Se 
> Gor) A “ te & 2 a6 as 
Pie tap # eo aan Bes otal ne: karat oe ee 
{ Ge Sw Ae Bae’ Paes OO, = BGs Fo» .* 
a o@. 6 BAO ma Ce he Bap ~ S. y, WEG.AP ty OR Sey 
Bit Sipe <ile suamanen, fae gees Ma aak teen 
EGANS c? PA AO NS Ree Re ay a 
tae eeese wae EN aa OS A EE 
* Pe ae? ge, >. eye? 12a w, ay 7 VAT SSS 5% 
ys iy lt ape linger Pe) ~ UA TES OSS aT 
ee ee Geka. SF LS ay Pris a a pes Sodan 68 Soo @ gare ES 
“ge 7h Ae mae gan ~~ rep ° + ~ Wasa E'S 6 
sGRae » eae bs = “¥x4, 8 Os cng Snes Bat WRN 4; Za hae © 
LA Lee RS Myo ROP os oe ee age Os a 
€ OG HR 26: «pie EL oe OB as ay Vg pom 92 My , eee 
Pi a aR RCT Oe OS ag a= 
a Ae mY Die e ima ae fe ak SG KE ome, 
& ~~ >| Say. ie A 3 fF e. $288 
=: PRON Ny > 495m. * oT eo 29 wan Mh, by 
1 ont BOE. s LOLS BF Pee alg wee EOIN! 
Oe. on 9 Oe } RS COs Fa OED 9 5 ocrenn OLS. LO 
<tr) Se aaa, SADE NS 


Soe 


"By ee 
s 


ae 


Fe & 
y 


é 
a 


ay 


mae. 


Ey 


gee 
x 


LJ 


tee 
re as 
£2) 


\ 
‘Be? i 
hs 


APS 


ST 


‘ 


5 


le 
a 


Pas 
SS 


ENA: 
PS xe. 
Px), 


i] 
ro ~ 


A) 


(2 


oof) 


: 


2» 
NS 
a) 


Fe 


a 


aX 


ae 
SOAK S 
See 
Sor 
a, 


22% 


\ 


=a ©, 
BF, 


AS 


Tf 


age 


Fae @e Pe 
SS 


.. 
as SS, 
age 8A a. AS 
EET RX OR 
r so Maes a 


» 
f, 


LA 


1) 
a 


Oh 
Pen 
) 


eS 


GD "a | 


> 


eo 3a 
“ 
oe. 


saute 


\ 
Ve aoe 


eee) 
fh 

2 

3 


by 

iF) 
sor 
Pug £8. 


a tee : 
Pars 


=e) 


ca 
LS 


AAS 13 wh 


“a 


ie ee 


is 


‘des z 
eee: 


: 


Sa. ®. 
ape et 
y 


Atm 


Kk 
— 
4 


ey 
ame 


BSG SS, 


THAIN 


